Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Gary Weiss and his cavalcade of socks _ Mantanmoreland Saga Update
Posted by: Piperdown
Mantanmoreland is Gary, 3
Mantanmoreland isn't Gary, 0
Patrick Byrne, Juddster, and Gary all say that Gary = MM
That latter is just very inconsistent in what he tells whom, lol.
That is all, carry on with the show on WP, folks. Remember, they know more than you do about this.
And G-dett's Cormac McCarthian yarn of the Wikipedia Tombstoner is the most brilliant prose I've yet to be privileged to read on any WP Tawk page.
Posted by: WhispersOfWisdom
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sun 17th February 2008, 12:10pm) 
Mantanmoreland is Gary, 3
Mantanmoreland isn't Gary, 0
Patrick Byrne, Juddster, and Gary all say that Gary = MM
That latter is just very inconsistent in what he tells whom, lol.
That is all, carry on with the show on WP, folks. Remember, they know more than you do about this.
And G-dett's Cormac McCarthian yarn of the Wikipedia Tombstoner is the most brilliant prose I've yet to be privileged to read on any WP Tawk page.
Please link...?
Thank you. I do not know how to get to the source.
Posted by: One
QUOTE(WhispersOfWisdom @ Sun 17th February 2008, 6:45pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sun 17th February 2008, 12:10pm)
And G-dett's Cormac McCarthian yarn of the Wikipedia Tombstoner is the most brilliant prose I've yet to be privileged to read on any WP Tawk page.
Please link...?
Thank you. I do not know how to get to the source.
Interesting read. "Circumstantial," but it makes sense, and it's fascinating stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_G-Dett
Posted by: Piperdown
Very Churchillian. Great sense of humour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FEvidence&diff=192195996&oldid=192189071
Posted by: Aloft
Holy shit. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a must read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=192189071
QUOTE(G-Dett)
: A fellow Wikipedian has pointed out to me that Josephine Earp, Wyatt’s wife and the focus of User:Lastexit’s first edits after his Tombstone debut, was Jewish. As it happens, there was a significant Jewish population in the Tombstone of the 19th century; indeed the town's very name was given to it by a Jewish pioneer who opened its first general store. [147] In light of the striking nexus of interests here – Jewish history, the Earp vendetta ride, historical/tourist sites in the Southwest, and the legends of Tom(b)stone® – I regarded this as an interesting lead. I understand that what I’ve found and am presenting is 'evidence' of a peculiar sort.
Tombstone’s most famous tourist site is the Boothill Graveyard, where many of its legendary gunslingers and historical personalities are interred. Boothill has within it a Jewish section, which went unnoticed for over 100 years; a memorial was added in 1984. [148] [149] The small Jewish burial ground has no remaining headstones, and only one grave – that of a child. [150] He died in 1889, when he was one year and four days old. There is still a small stone marker for the child in the burial ground today, next to the memorial. His name was Sam Harris.
I would like to be able to say that User:Samiharris was created one year and four days after Mantanmoreland was created, but that would be a few hours off. He was created – for what it's worth – one year, three days and ~three hours after Mantanmoreland. There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.--G-Dett (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Tombstone’s most famous tourist site is the Boothill Graveyard, where many of its legendary gunslingers and historical personalities are interred. Boothill has within it a Jewish section, which went unnoticed for over 100 years; a memorial was added in 1984. [148] [149] The small Jewish burial ground has no remaining headstones, and only one grave – that of a child. [150] He died in 1889, when he was one year and four days old. There is still a small stone marker for the child in the burial ground today, next to the memorial. His name was Sam Harris.
I would like to be able to say that User:Samiharris was created one year and four days after Mantanmoreland was created, but that would be a few hours off. He was created – for what it's worth – one year, three days and ~three hours after Mantanmoreland. There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.--G-Dett (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Aloft @ Sun 17th February 2008, 9:40pm)
There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.
And then there are those of us who are moved in the general direction of the bathroom so we can throw up...
I mean, how long has this gone on? Two years, almost? And how much effort have some of us put into it, trying to convince these WP {insert epithet here}s of something that was so blatantly obvious all along that we could only conclude that Weiss was laughing uproariously over how stupid and easily cowed they all were, pretty much the whole time? (And still are, in many cases?)
G-Dett is a fine admin so far as it goes, and smart as heck for figuring that out, but it's not really so hard to come up with clever sock puppet names - the people who do it usually have plenty of time to work it all out in advance.
Still, Gary should have waited the extra 21 hours.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(Aloft @ Mon 18th February 2008, 3:40am)
Holy shit. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a must read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=192189071
QUOTE(G-Dett)
: A fellow Wikipedian has pointed out to me that Josephine Earp, Wyatt’s wife and the focus of User:Lastexit’s first edits after his Tombstone debut, was Jewish. As it happens, there was a significant Jewish population in the Tombstone of the 19th century; indeed the town's very name was given to it by a Jewish pioneer who opened its first general store. [147] In light of the striking nexus of interests here – Jewish history, the Earp vendetta ride, historical/tourist sites in the Southwest, and the legends of Tom(b)stone® – I regarded this as an interesting lead. I understand that what I’ve found and am presenting is 'evidence' of a peculiar sort.
Tombstone’s most famous tourist site is the Boothill Graveyard, where many of its legendary gunslingers and historical personalities are interred. Boothill has within it a Jewish section, which went unnoticed for over 100 years; a memorial was added in 1984. [148] [149] The small Jewish burial ground has no remaining headstones, and only one grave – that of a child. [150] He died in 1889, when he was one year and four days old. There is still a small stone marker for the child in the burial ground today, next to the memorial. His name was Sam Harris.
I would like to be able to say that User:Samiharris was created one year and four days after Mantanmoreland was created, but that would be a few hours off. He was created – for what it's worth – one year, three days and ~three hours after Mantanmoreland. There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.--G-Dett (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Tombstone’s most famous tourist site is the Boothill Graveyard, where many of its legendary gunslingers and historical personalities are interred. Boothill has within it a Jewish section, which went unnoticed for over 100 years; a memorial was added in 1984. [148] [149] The small Jewish burial ground has no remaining headstones, and only one grave – that of a child. [150] He died in 1889, when he was one year and four days old. There is still a small stone marker for the child in the burial ground today, next to the memorial. His name was Sam Harris.
I would like to be able to say that User:Samiharris was created one year and four days after Mantanmoreland was created, but that would be a few hours off. He was created – for what it's worth – one year, three days and ~three hours after Mantanmoreland. There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.--G-Dett (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Wow. That's unbelievably good work.
Posted by: WordBomb
QUOTE(Aloft @ Sun 17th February 2008, 11:40pm)
Holy shit. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a must read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=192189071
QUOTE(G-Dett)
: A fellow Wikipedian has pointed out to me that Josephine Earp, Wyatt’s wife and the focus of User:Lastexit’s first edits after his Tombstone debut, was Jewish. As it happens, there was a significant Jewish population in the Tombstone of the 19th century; indeed the town's very name was given to it by a Jewish pioneer who opened its first general store. [147] In light of the striking nexus of interests here – Jewish history, the Earp vendetta ride, historical/tourist sites in the Southwest, and the legends of Tom(b)stone® – I regarded this as an interesting lead. I understand that what I’ve found and am presenting is 'evidence' of a peculiar sort.
Tombstone’s most famous tourist site is the Boothill Graveyard, where many of its legendary gunslingers and historical personalities are interred. Boothill has within it a Jewish section, which went unnoticed for over 100 years; a memorial was added in 1984. [148] [149] The small Jewish burial ground has no remaining headstones, and only one grave – that of a child. [150] He died in 1889, when he was one year and four days old. There is still a small stone marker for the child in the burial ground today, next to the memorial. His name was Sam Harris.
I would like to be able to say that User:Samiharris was created one year and four days after Mantanmoreland was created, but that would be a few hours off. He was created – for what it's worth – one year, three days and ~three hours after Mantanmoreland. There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.--G-Dett (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Tombstone’s most famous tourist site is the Boothill Graveyard, where many of its legendary gunslingers and historical personalities are interred. Boothill has within it a Jewish section, which went unnoticed for over 100 years; a memorial was added in 1984. [148] [149] The small Jewish burial ground has no remaining headstones, and only one grave – that of a child. [150] He died in 1889, when he was one year and four days old. There is still a small stone marker for the child in the burial ground today, next to the memorial. His name was Sam Harris.
I would like to be able to say that User:Samiharris was created one year and four days after Mantanmoreland was created, but that would be a few hours off. He was created – for what it's worth – one year, three days and ~three hours after Mantanmoreland. There is a touch of the poet (as well as the gumshoe) in old Weiss. I am moved, almost to clemency, just reflecting on it.--G-Dett (talk) 01:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
And let us give it up for G-Dett. Wow!!
Posted by: Kato
No amount of Kinky Friedman prose can disguise the fact that this Arbcom case is predictably disintegrating into a farce. All it needs now is for Bobby Ewing to step on to the page and declare that the whole thing was a dream.
Why don't they just announce :
- Gary Weiss has been operating several accounts to use Wikipedia as part of a larger campaign against the CEO of Overstock.com.
- Block his accounts.
- Have done with it.
Posted by: Robster
QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 17th February 2008, 11:33pm)
Why don't they just announce :
- Gary Weiss has been operating several accounts to use Wikipedia as part of a larger campaign against the CEO of Overstock.com.
- Block his accounts.
- Have done with it.
That's the question, isn't it?
Why DON'T they?
If we knew why they refuse to see the elephant in the room, I think we'd know a lot more about Inside Wikipedia than we ever thought there was to know.
Posted by: WordBomb
Two questions:
1-Has there ever been a WP:SOCK case that has seen so much evidence presented?
2-Has there ever been a WP:SOCK case that had reached so advanced a state of overkill and yet the subject remain defiant?
Posted by: Kato
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Mon 18th February 2008, 4:42am)
Two questions:
1-Has there ever been a WP:SOCK case that has seen so much evidence presented?
2-Has there ever been a WP:SOCK case that had reached so advanced a state of overkill and yet the subject remain defiant?
No and no.
But even Patrick Byrne http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_.7BPatrick_Byrne.7D now making strange allusions and vague statements. What is it about that page? I feel like going on myself and claiming to be The Wife of Lord Weiss III, producing interpretations of The Dead Sea Scrolls as my evidence. Just to join in the fun.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(WordBomb @ Mon 18th February 2008, 4:42am)
Two questions:
1-Has there ever been a WP:SOCK case that has seen so much evidence presented?
2-Has there ever been a WP:SOCK case that had reached so advanced a state of overkill and yet the subject remain defiant?
Well, there was my Oldwindybear report:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Proabivouac/Oldwindybear&Stillstudying
There is more linguistic evidence, by far. It takes a lot of time to do this, unfortunately.
OWB did remain defiant, but no one believed him and he left. Later on, he admitted it to me, and we actually became friends. I tried to get people to let him come back, but they weren't having any of it.
Posted by: Kato
Here's http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=192220414 reviewing G-Dett's evidence
QUOTE(Someone)
G-Dett's evidence made me immediately think of Foucault's Pendulum (which, come to think of it, should probably be required reading for any Wikipedian about to embark on an investigation of complex sockpuppetry - hell it should be required reading for everyone). It also put me in mind of Keith Jenkins' concept of "imaginaries" as a replacement for for traditional Rankean history.
What?
Posted by: taiwopanfob
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Mon 18th February 2008, 3:54am)
Wow. That's unbelievably good work.
Fuck, yeah!
But it's a cryin' shame Wikipedia has no idea how to use some of their finest human resources. G-Dett's, Cool Hand Luke's (and others) investigative capability could be put to better use, but are instead "allowed" (so to speak) to waste it on cases even the most corrupt, inept, real-world judge would have come to summary judgment a long, long, time ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FEvidence&diff=192206916&oldid=192159334
I concur with WAS: ArbCom and their brown-noses are being played as the fools they (now) demonstrably are. Such fools, I think it is not out of the realm of the possible that like any other dysfunctional organization, ArbCom will simply ignore it all and defend its toadies and their past decisions rather than admit they have been a victim of a detailed, long-term, confidence trick. "More studies needed, G-Dett." Classic mark behavior.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Mon 18th February 2008, 3:22am)
Very Churchillian. Great sense of humour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FEvidence&diff=192195996&oldid=192189071
and of course Durova blanks first and reads later, and suggests a course of action that caused the whole darned sockmess in the first place.
LOL
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FEvidence&diff=192237283&oldid=192231801
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=next&oldid=192237283
WP'ians are a bit touchy on the hairtrigger. Methinks they've been reading offsite. Maybe even BADSITES.
Remeber that M.Night Shamalamdingdong (No dis, M. Night, praise be unto you - "Unbreakable" is a great movie") where all the Pilgrims are forbidden to enter the woods, only to later find out the elders were hiding the real world from them?
from now on, Durova, babe...I suggest that in when Wikipedians have "evidence" that makes exalted holy Wikipedians look bad, they post it to a common place on WP where all the Commoners can decide for themselves.
Your Star Chamber Arbcom and sekret mailing lists are joke.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Someone)
G-Dett's evidence made me immediately think of Foucault's Pendulum (which, come to think of it, should probably be required reading for any Wikipedian about to embark on an investigation of complex sockpuppetry - hell it should be required reading for everyone). It also put me in mind of Keith Jenkins' concept of "imaginaries" as a replacement for for traditional Rankean history.
I assume he's referring to the Umberto Eco novel? The one with the Knights Templar, the Rosicrucians, the Comte de Ste. Germain, and all that? I suspect this person is simply trying to show off his personal literacy. And as for Keith Jenkins, the author of Why History?, I'd say the less said the better!
Maybe this is just such a big comeuppance for the cabalistas that it's inevitable that there would be this kind of commentary tossed in, but come on, Wikipedians! This is not some sort of genius mastermind you're dealing with here! This is just some guy with a bunch of accounts who got in good with a few high mucky-muck admins and milked it and milked it and (did I already say?) milked it. Nothing magical, supernatural, or transcendent has occurred here whatsoever.
Posted by: Kato
More crazed "evidence". This time the culprit is, of course, JzG:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=192274226
QUOTE(JzG)
# See [92] for an example of the strong (I would say incontrovertible) evidence that Bagley is a vile agenda-driven troll who would be completely unwelcome here even if Gary Weiss were the sole editor of the overstock.com article. Bagley's problem is simple: he attacks anybody who suggests that overstock's poor stock performance is down to poor management and consistent failure to return a profit. Yes, his job is to defend overstock, but his methods are completely out of line, and this should be obvious to everybody. There is no crusade against Bagley, merely an understandable unwillingness to let this exceptionally difficult individual abuse Wikipedia for his own ends. Ironically, Byrne comes across as a much less problematic character.
# Notwithstanding the above, a case on Mantanmoreland is not the place to kvetch about what people think of Bagley - if you want to appeal his ban, raise a separate case.
# Even if SlimVirgin did own the mailing list (which I can't remember), so what? SlimVirgin is an admin in good standing, and the lists were set up to discuss a problem which was experienced by a number of editors, albeit you and Dan Tobias feel the need to pretend this problem does not exist. Jimbo thinks it does, I think it does, the victims of harassment think it does, and really there is nothing at all wrong with wanting to discuss how best to handle that. Your "evidence" on this point is therefore moot.
# As for the rest, I recommend a career with these folks, your talent for picking cherries is undeniable. Guy (Help!) 09:42, 18
# Notwithstanding the above, a case on Mantanmoreland is not the place to kvetch about what people think of Bagley - if you want to appeal his ban, raise a separate case.
# Even if SlimVirgin did own the mailing list (which I can't remember), so what? SlimVirgin is an admin in good standing, and the lists were set up to discuss a problem which was experienced by a number of editors, albeit you and Dan Tobias feel the need to pretend this problem does not exist. Jimbo thinks it does, I think it does, the victims of harassment think it does, and really there is nothing at all wrong with wanting to discuss how best to handle that. Your "evidence" on this point is therefore moot.
# As for the rest, I recommend a career with these folks, your talent for picking cherries is undeniable. Guy (Help!) 09:42, 18
Guy's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JzG has stated for some months that he has "retired from Wikipedia" as he "is tired of silly drama". He has turned the rest of his talk page into a memorial to his late father. Which shows no signs of disappearing to be returned to a Wikipedia talk page.
This man has clearly lost his mind. Someone put him out of his -- and everyone else's -- misery and ban him from the site.
PS. And get these f-ing opinions off the "evidence page"!! We http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20071215/ten-reasons-why-the-arbitration-committee-doesnt-matter/ that Arbcom was a circus where looming ghouls are allowed to interfere at will, leaving the committee "utterly lost in discerning the difference between evidence, opinion and rumor".
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 18th February 2008, 5:35pm)
More crazed "evidence". This time the culprit is, of course, JzG:
as for jzG, just read this and ban him, now, instantly, and for good:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cla68/RfC/Sandbox#Incivility_and_personal_attacks
And folks, Gary is MM. Crying forgery is embarrassing. It's just going to make things worse.
Posted by: BobbyBombastic
QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 18th February 2008, 2:28am)
This is not some sort of genius mastermind you're dealing with here! This is just some guy with a bunch of accounts who got in good with a few high mucky-muck admins and milked it and milked it and (did I already say?) milked it. Nothing magical, supernatural, or transcendent has occurred here whatsoever.
It does have a certain style to it that is remarkable though. If people keep saying how creatively Mantan worked his sock tricks, maybe it will goad his ego into coming forth and offering a confession, or at least a half-confession. He obviously thinks a lot of himself. I'd actually encourage the "good God Gary, you are brilliant!" meme.
Posted by: dtobias
Where does JzG get off continually making the straw-man argument that I supposedly don't believe stalking or harassment is ever a genuine problem? In http://dan.tobias.name/controversies/cyber/wiki2.html responding to his, I specifically state that it is something that really exists, but also that it has often been blown way out of proportion in some cases for political purposes, and redefined in ways that make perfectly innocent activity be considered cases of "harassment".
Posted by: Yehudi
QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:13pm)
Where does JzG get off continually making the straw-man argument
Diversionary tactics can be quite effective on Wikipedia.
Posted by: Cedric
QUOTE(Yehudi @ Mon 18th February 2008, 12:19pm)
QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:13pm)
Where does JzG get off continually making the straw-man argument
Diversionary tactics can be quite effective on Wikipedia.
Particularly with teenagers and self-diagnosed aspies with short attention spans.
Posted by: Aloft
QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 18th February 2008, 12:13pm)
Where does JzG get off continually making the straw-man argument that I supposedly don't believe stalking or harassment is ever a genuine problem?
I wonder what he will have left when Wikipedia finally decides to dispense with his presence?
Posted by: thekohser
QUOTE(Aloft @ Mon 18th February 2008, 2:02pm)
What else can he do? He can't credibly claim that MM isn't Weiss or Samiharris anymore, and he is unable to admit that he was wrong. He has nothing left but his nonsensical ranting and attacks on other people. He has to defend Wikipedia against... something, anything.
I wonder what he will have left when Wikipedia finally decides to dispense with his presence?
I hear that Usenet is a great venue for people like him!
Posted by: the fieryangel
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:49pm)
I hear that Usenet is a great venue for people like him!
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/Web/public.nsf/Documents/mini-faq-liddite?OpenDocument
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/Web/public.nsf/Documents/mini-faq-psmith?OpenDocument
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/Web/public.nsf/Documents/mini-faq-duhg?OpenDocument
http://www.outrider.org.uk/wiki/Paul_Smith_%28nutter%29
So, I guess we can file this under been there, done that...
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:14pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:49pm)
I hear that Usenet is a great venue for people like him!
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/Web/public.nsf/Documents/mini-faq-liddite?OpenDocument
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/Web/public.nsf/Documents/mini-faq-psmith?OpenDocument
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk:8080/Web/public.nsf/Documents/mini-faq-duhg?OpenDocument
http://www.outrider.org.uk/wiki/Paul_Smith_%28nutter%29
So, I guess we can file this under been there, done that...
By Wikipedia's definition, Guy runs an attack site.
Thanks to Guy's comments, so is RfArb/Mantanmoreland (although I'd guess that Bagley and Byrne are happy enough to get a hearing.) When, if ever, will "attack sites" proponents get that keeping him around discredits their position far more than any help he can offer? It doesn't mean no attacks and outings, but just a list of people who can be (indeed should be) attacked and outed, and a list of those who can't be. Nice if you're on that second list, I suppose, but what is there here for anybody else to believe in?
Your coalition is crumbling because you won't walk the walk.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 18th February 2008, 7:49pm)
I hear that Usenet is a great venue for people like him!
no, he tried that right before he started tomstonering on wp, and they ran him and his socks off a usenet group too. i'm not kidding.
Posted by: Castle Rock
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Mon 18th February 2008, 12:53pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 18th February 2008, 7:49pm)
I hear that Usenet is a great venue for people like him!
no, he tried that right before he started tomstonering on wp, and they ran him and his socks off a usenet group too. i'm not kidding.
Not quite, after ten years of posting, he made a Tomstoner-esque slipup. When questioned he just disappeared, never to be seen again on the Uselessnet.
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Mon 18th February 2008, 12:51pm)
Thanks to Guy's comments, so is RfArb/Mantanmoreland (although I'd guess that Bagley and Byrne are happy enough to get a hearing.) When, if ever, will "attack sites" proponents get that keeping him around discredits their position far more than any help he can offer? It doesn't mean no attacks and outings, but just a list of people who can be (indeed should be) attacked and outed, and a list of those who can't be. Nice if you're on that second list, I suppose, but what is there here for anybody else to believe in?
Your coalition is crumbling because you won't walk the walk.
And it was attacks on fellow Wikipedian's too. He had articles on User:Rfwoolf and User:Atren.
Posted by: Kato
Oh crap. So Guy Chapman has been doing this kind of thing on the internet for years? And still keeps whole pages on people he's been in dispute with on Usenet?
Posted by: One
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:06pm)
It does have a certain style to it that is remarkable though. If people keep saying how creatively Mantan worked his sock tricks, maybe it will goad his ego into coming forth and offering a confession, or at least a half-confession. He obviously thinks a lot of himself. I'd actually encourage the "good God Gary, you are brilliant!" meme.
I assumed that why G-Dett posted it. Gary Weiss can take perverse pride and save some kind of face by imagining himself the most poetic of all puppet masters.
I think it's unremarkable myself. As someone else said, people often have some time to think about their sock names.
Posted by: WordBomb
QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:39pm)
Oh crap. So Guy Chapman has been doing this kind of thing on the internet for years? And still keeps whole pages on people he's been in dispute with on Usenet?
Posted by: Proabivouac
JzG has now removed his mistitled "evidence" section from the page, writing
QUOTE
"User:Cla68 makes the case against Bagley far more powerfully than I could. It's very subtle use of irony, and tyook me a while to spot.)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=192422176&oldid=192398926
I suppose he's referring to Cla68's collection of attacks against Mr. Bagley:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Anti-Bagley.2FByrne.2FOverstock.com_vitriol_and_personal_attacks
Surely those nine upstanding Wikipedians cannot be wrong! Then again, one was just desysoped for socking, another is the subject this case, another should recuse himself as Weiss' shill on the Committee, and another is JzG himself…
Does this mean that JzG has given up? That he knows Mantanmoreland is busted, and just doesn't want to admit it? It's tough to imagine him apologizing to Cla68 et al.
Does anyone notice that the same side who'd say they'd like to limit this case only to a factual judgment about Mantanmoreland's socking are also trying to make it about Bagley?
If Bagley is bad, you mustn't have been had.
Posted by: Kato
More bogus "evidence" from someone called Newbyguesses. This user presents no valid evidence whatsoever, merely adding his two cents of nonsense, and concluding that WP should delete the article on Naked Short Selling!?!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_User:Newbyguesses
This is a textbook case illustrating GlassBeadGame's http://wikipediareview.com/blog/20071215/ten-reasons-why-the-arbitration-committee-doesnt-matter/. It's just an unregulated free-for-all where anyone can have a say regardless of whether they have anything valid to add or not. Smothering what serious discourse might have arisen with heaps of ill considered crap.
Bureaucrats should go through the page and just trash anything like this -- and ensure that the evidence page contains only evidence. Not uninformed opinions.
Posted by: Miltopia
OMG DUROVA WHAT are you doing??? Her whole evidence section is about her uncle and the HARASSMENT SITE. I hope that hag isn't too old to have kids, she needs to have some so that they can listen to her all the time... then maybe she wouldn't force herself on Wikipediaw so much.
Posted by: Aloft
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:57pm)
Does this mean that JzG has given up? That he knows Mantanmoreland is busted, and just doesn't want to admit it? It's tough to imagine him apologizing to Cla68 et al.
He's given up, but it's more of a "Looks like the troll enablers sabotaged us good guys once again" kind of giving up. He'll never admit he was wrong about Weiss. He doesn't have it in him. He'd rather lash out at the people who actually write the encyclopedia, like Cla68.Posted by: Piperdown
Thatcher is a piece of work. For some reason, he/she has been given some false impression that I was banned for my editing of NSS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cla68&diff=prev&oldid=192444745
This person is full of <baloney>.
Thatcher, can you point out to me anything I did on those WP artcles that led to my banning? No, you can't. I gave up on fighting with Gary Weiss and his Admin Approved Sock show one month before your buddy Gerard pulled his cunning stunt.
I was banned because I emailed links, privately off-WP, edits showing that Gary Weiss, you, and your admin buddies had a little fun abusing wikipedia.
Thatcher, how about you stop spewing lies on WP about people that you won't let defend themselves.
Chuck, don't apologise or cave in to these people.
Thatcher, resign your "tools". You're a liar and an embarrassment to WP. Hope you enjoy the next shoe (or sock, lol) dropping.
Posted by: SenseMaker
The Gary Weiss saga is essentially over. This ArbCom is just a way to clean up the loose ends. There is no way they could exonerate him.
In fact, it is sort of boring if you put it into proper context:
Old journalist who tends to harbor grudges and has a significant lack of ethics sockpuppets on Wikipedia to attack his enemies in his surprisingly ample free time. I can't believe that this unabashed liar has a semi-professional career.
What a complete waste of time this Gary Weiss saga is. He should just go away and stop wasting everyone's time. He must have a deficit of reasoning to keep up this fight and to keep up this web of lies.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:04am)
The Gary Weiss saga is essentially over. This ArbCom is just a way to clean up the loose ends. There is no way they could exonerate him.
In fact, it is sort of boring if you put it into proper context:
Old journalist who tends to harbor grudges and has a significant lack of ethnics sockpuppets on Wikipedia to attack his enemies in his surprisingly ample free time. I can't believe that this unabashed liar has a semi-professional career.
What a complete waste of time this Gary Weiss saga is. He should just go away and stop wasting everyone's time. He must have a deficit of reasoning to keep up this fight and to keep up this web of lies.
there's a lot more to the rest of the story.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:04am)
The Gary Weiss saga is essentially over. This ArbCom is just a way to clean up the loose ends. There is no way they could exonerate him.
If that's all they do, it'd be a miscarriage of justice.
What people need to understand here is that Matthew Brown (Morven) told the whistleblower in so many words to go to Hell, while assuring prominent Wikipedians that it didn't matter anyway if Mantanmoreland was Weiss.
That was an institutional decision, it was a horrible decision, and Morven was in the driver's seat. Morven shouldn't just recuse himself, he should resign.
Posted by: Kato
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:04am)
The Gary Weiss saga is essentially over. This ArbCom is just a way to clean up the loose ends.
I think that's our job.
The loose ends are the group of lawless Wikipedia figures who allowed, in Wordbomb's words, for Wikipedia to be "turned into a literal weapon against himself and Overstock". And who attacked everyone from Charles Ainsworth to Cade Metz in order to protect this farce.
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15897
Ultimately, it is our job to record this sham, and add it to our growing catalog of shambolic, irresponsible and damaging governance practices propagated by Jimbo Wales / Wikipedia,
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:18am)
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:04am)
The Gary Weiss saga is essentially over. This ArbCom is just a way to clean up the loose ends.
I think that's our job.
The loose ends are the group of lawless Wikipedia figures who allowed, in Wordbomb's words, for Wikipedia to be "turned into a literal weapon against himself and Overstock". And who attacked everyone from Charles Ainsworth to Cade Metz in order to protect this farce.
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15897
Ultimately, it is our job to record this sham, and add it to our growing catalog of shambolic, irresponsible and damaging governance practices propagated by Jimbo Wales / Wikipedia,
Desysoping JzG is a no-brainer.
Posted by: taiwopanfob
QUOTE(Aloft @ Tue 19th February 2008, 1:28am)
[JZG will] never admit he was wrong about Weiss.
He is one of the many who are the marks in GW's confidence scam. Even grandmothers defrauded of their entire wealth have extreme trouble admitting they were "wrong" about the con-man. ArbCom will probably follow along in this manner, and for the exactly the same reasons.
Posted by: SenseMaker
I'm reading though the evidence from Cla68 and I now do agree that there is serious administrative abuse going on in relation to this. It is a mess. I would say the blame originates with JzG, SlimVirgin, and David Gerard. They were probably in direct contact with GW/Mantanmoreland and sympathized with what he claimed was his plight. These three then acted as opinion leaders in the community, thus implicitly sanctioning and encouraging others to side with Mantanmoreland and against Overstock and friends.
I think this is understandable and most didn't expect a semi-professional, as Gary Weiss is, to be such an unabashed liar. The extent of Gary Weiss's web of lies really surprises me. I would go so far as to describe Gary Weiss as a true "con man", a guy who works to gain the "confidence" of a bunch of useful marks.
UPDATE: taiwopanfob also uses the phrase "con man." I think this is the best way to describe Gary Weiss given a fresh look at the totality of the evidence.
Posted by: Kato
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:26am)
Desysoping JzG is a no-brainer.
Banning JzG for a relentless verifiable on-site campaign of personal attacks and lies beyond even what Wikipedia Review at its worst has been accused of, is a no-brainer.
Forget the desysoping. Good faith Wikipedians should be calling for him to be banned. It went beyond a joke 6 months ago.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:35am)
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:26am)
Desysoping JzG is a no-brainer.
Banning JzG for a relentless verifiable on-site campaign of personal attacks and lies beyond even what Wikipedia Review at its worst has been accused of, is a no-brainer.
Forget the desysoping. Good faith Wikipedians should be calling for him to be banned. It went beyond a joke 6 months ago.
JzG doesn't merit a ban, but a long block might do everyone some good. His behavior in arbitration is a microcosm of the way he's been disrupting the project as a whole.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:39am)
JzG doesn't merit a ban
LOL. I think you've been on the planet WP too long.
People come to wikipedia, see an "administrator" with a long litany of c--ts, f--cks, blanking, mental health confessions, sprawling rants greatly in need of {{fact}}, sockpuppetry, quit-drama, etc, and wonder why this joke is even allowed to edit WP, not to mention police it.
Posted by: Kato
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:39am)
JzG doesn't merit a ban, but a long block might do everyone some good. His behavior in arbitration is a microcosm of the way he's been disrupting the project as a whole.
Well I can't think of anyone who has caused more sustained disruption than JzG on so many major issues. He surpassed Slim in the last 6 months, and went past Kelly and others long ago. As for his nemeses Jonny, Wikipedia Review, and Wordbomb, they don't even come close to the antagonism and chaos JzG has inflicted on WP. There are episodes such as the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Angela_Kennedy outrage which still haven't seen the light of day, due to the sheer scale of JzG's mayhem elsewhere.
I wasn't aware until this thread how far back JzGs online obsessive antagonism goes, pre-dating Wikipedia, back to Usenet days. Where JzG would engage in similar wars against perceived enemies. He's another one of those people on WP, with little interest in creating a body of work, but a lot of interest in engaging in online feuds. What do they call people like that?
Posted by: everyking
QUOTE(Kato @ Tue 19th February 2008, 3:53am)
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:39am)
JzG doesn't merit a ban, but a long block might do everyone some good. His behavior in arbitration is a microcosm of the way he's been disrupting the project as a whole.
Well I can't think of anyone who has caused more sustained disruption than JzG on so many major issues. He surpassed Slim in the last 6 months, and went past Kelly and others long ago. As for his nemeses Jonny, Wikipedia Review, and Wordbomb, they don't even come close to the antagonism and chaos JzG has inflicted on WP. There are episodes such as the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Angela_Kennedy outrage which still haven't seen the light of day, due to the sheer scale of JzG's mayhem elsewhere.
I wasn't aware until this thread how far back JzGs online obsessive antagonism goes, pre-dating Wikipedia, back to Usenet days. Where JzG would engage in similar wars against perceived enemies. He's another one of those people on WP, with little interest in creating a body of work, but a lot of interest in engaging in online feuds. What do they call people like that?
A ban is certainly deserved, but I'd be happy if he was just declawed. Desysopping and civility parole, strong admonition to concentrate on productive article work. Sadly, I think even that may be a hopeless dream.
Posted by: Cedric
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:04pm)
The Gary Weiss saga is essentially over. This ArbCom is just a way to clean up the loose ends.
There is no way they could exonerate him.
Don't be so sure. There is plenty of time yet for Jimbo to perform his raging mastodon act.
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:04pm)
Old journalist who tends to harbor grudges and has a significant lack of ethics sockpuppets on Wikipedia to attack his enemies in his surprisingly ample free time. I can't believe that this unabashed liar has a semi-professional career.
What a complete waste of time this Gary Weiss saga is. He should just go away and stop wasting everyone's time. He must have a deficit of reasoning to keep up this fight and to keep up this web of lies.
Hard to argue with that.
Posted by: One
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 12:57am)
Does this mean that JzG has given up? That he knows Mantanmoreland is busted, and just doesn't want to admit it? It's tough to imagine him apologizing to Cla68 et al.
I don't think JzG is that self-aware. I think he just dimly perceives that it might look bad for him when Cla68 releases the next RfC-to-ArbCom freight train, which could result in his desysoping. He's a true believer, and maybe the only one left. Even the cabal seems to be hedging, although there's the usual cognitive dissonance that occurs when a mark realizes that there is no pea under the shells.
I doubt they were all conned. It seems likely (by their always-equivocal statements) that some of them probably knew. Not JzG though.
Posted by: WhispersOfWisdom
QUOTE(One @ Mon 18th February 2008, 10:12pm)
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 12:57am)
Does this mean that JzG has given up? That he knows Mantanmoreland is busted, and just doesn't want to admit it? It's tough to imagine him apologizing to Cla68 et al.
I don't think JzG is that self-aware. I think he just dimly perceives that it might look bad for him when Cla68 releases the next RfC-to-ArbCom freight train, which should result in his desysoping. He's a true believer, and maybe the only one left. Even the cabal seems to be hedging, although there's the usual cognitive dissonance that occurs when a mark realizes that there is no pea under the shells.
I doubt they were all conned. It seems likely (by their always-equivocal statements) that some of them probably knew. Not JzG though.
Oh please? Now you are thinking that JzG is not bright or he is delusional and out of touch?
There are very few innocent administrators and "fearless leaders" at Wikipedia. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is now all about power and greed, and there is very little there in the way of honesty and integrity... JzG included.
Without any well defined hierarchy of leadership, it is truly a chaotic scramble for who's who and who can blame who.
Banning everyone from Jimbo ( yes, he has proven to be part of the problem, not part of the solution)on down would be required to end the deep sucking sound that the world is perceiving on a daily basis. The few people that have been holding out hope for some miracle rally will slowly move on in disgust and disillusionment.
The cloud created by fake profiles and anonymous dictators lacking in age related wisdom has indeed taken it's toll on nearly everyone there. All the kings horses...
Posted by: Heat
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Tue 19th February 2008, 2:04am)
Old journalist who tends to harbor grudges and has a significant lack of ethics sockpuppets on Wikipedia to attack his enemies in his surprisingly ample free time. I can't believe that this unabashed liar has a semi-professional career.
Who are you talking about here? Weiss or Mack?
Posted by: JohnA
Can I ask why http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JzG&action=edit is deleted and protected from being re-created?
Durova:
QUOTE
Per my presentation at SirFozzie's userspace, there is reason to accept this as a minimal baseline conclusion: Mantanmoreland and Samiharris have acted in concert to bypass normal consensus procedures at financial topic articles
Posted by: Nathan
He "doesn't like cruft" which is why he's had a redlink for ages.
This isn't new. 
Posted by: Achromatic
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:32pm)
I would say the blame originates with JzG, SlimVirgin, and David Gerard. They were probably in direct contact with GW/Mantanmoreland and sympathized with what he claimed was his plight.
Probably? There are several notes on Samiharris/MM :Talk pages from at least SlimVirgin asking for him to email her off wiki, to which he does - JzG also claims to have "several hundred" emails from each of them.
Add to this the farce that is Elonka coaching Matt Sanchez on "image management, the dark side of" by email, and you see that this is the modus operandi de rigeur of several elements high up within WP.
QUOTE(One @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:12pm)
I don't think JzG is that self-aware. I think he just dimly perceives that it might look bad for him when Cla68 releases the next RfC-to-ArbCom freight train, which should result in his desysoping.
And it is quite the freight train. Why settle at a mere couple of diffs when, as of this writing, there are SIXTY TWO breaches of guidelines across six principles.
He must know about that page. The only shame is that he does, and the time Cla68 spends polishing it in the sandbox, as necessary as it will be to roll this out (cause you know its going to get ol' Jimbo's hackles up, with admonitions of "how we should thank JzG for his tireless work on WP", etc), is that it allows him to formulate his defense.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 18th February 2008, 5:35pm)
Guy's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JzG has stated for some months that he has "retired from Wikipedia" as he "is tired of silly drama". He has turned the rest of his talk page into a memorial to his late father. Which shows no signs of disappearing to be returned to a Wikipedia talk page.
There is a line through the "R E" so he is just "TIRED".
Posted by: wikiwhistle
QUOTE(Kato @ Mon 18th February 2008, 5:35pm)
Guy's http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JzG has stated for some months that he has "retired from Wikipedia" as he "is tired of silly drama". He has turned the rest of his talk page into a memorial to his late father. Which shows no signs of disappearing to be returned to a Wikipedia talk page.
Yes but that's just an attention seeking/obstructive tactic again ,as at the bottom of the talk page there's a link to a page called something like wp/stuff, which he's using as a normal talkpage
Posted by: Moulton
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Mon 18th February 2008, 9:04pm)
Old journalist who tends to harbor grudges and has a significant lack of ethics sockpuppets on Wikipedia to attack his enemies in his surprisingly ample free time.
To my mind, this is the crux of the story -- a lack of ethics.
Wikipedia is self-destructing because the enterprise chronically fails to value accuracy and ethics in online media.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 19th February 2008, 3:29pm)
To my mind, this is the crux of the story -- a lack of ethics.
Wikipedia is self-destructing because the enterprise chronically fails to value accuracy and ethics in online media.
I strongly agree with that.
Posted by: WhispersOfWisdom
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 19th February 2008, 12:34pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Tue 19th February 2008, 3:29pm)
To my mind, this is the crux of the story -- a lack of ethics.
Wikipedia is self-destructing because the enterprise chronically fails to value accuracy and ethics in online media.
I strongly agree with that.
Indeed...agreed.
Add to that their failure to admit failure and the inherent repetition of making the same mistakes over and over again. I was most certainly insane when I used to make the same mistakes over and over, expecting a different result.
Posted by: Moulton
In my RfC, I stated that my objectives for participation in Wikipedia were to improve the accuracy, excellence, and ethics in online media. The adversarial editors and admins who blocked me took a dim view of my stated objectives.
Posted by: One
Wow, Alanyst compared 3629 accounts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Study_of_edit_summary_similarity: Samiharris, Mantanmoreland, and Piperdown?!
Posted by: Somey
Everyone's a winner! 
In honor of Mr. Weiss, I have added a new image to the avatar gallery:
I thought about changing the avatar setting for everyone on the site to that one, just for 24 hours, as our way of saying "thanks"... but I was worried people would mistake the gesture as too "mean-spirited."
Posted by: guy
QUOTE(One @ Wed 20th February 2008, 6:22am)
Wow, Alanyst compared 3629 accounts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Study_of_edit_summary_similarity: Samiharris, Mantanmoreland, and Piperdown?!
"all other 3627 editors who had edit counts between 1000 and 2000 during 2007"
Why that restriction? To protect the more prolific editors?
Posted by: jorge
Nice 
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(One @ Wed 20th February 2008, 6:22am)
Wow, Alanyst compared 3629 accounts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Study_of_edit_summary_similarity: Samiharris, Mantanmoreland, and Piperdown?!
note the "collisions". Those weren't just collisions, that was Gary and his sock gaming 3RR with someone (me) trying to play fair like an idiot.
Posted by: No one of consequence
QUOTE(guy @ Wed 20th February 2008, 1:04pm)
QUOTE(One @ Wed 20th February 2008, 6:22am)
Wow, Alanyst compared 3629 accounts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Study_of_edit_summary_similarity: Samiharris, Mantanmoreland, and Piperdown?!
"all other 3627 editors who had edit counts between 1000 and 2000 during 2007"
Why that restriction? To protect the more prolific editors?
No, because that's how many edits Sami and Mantan had. Including editors with fewer or more edits would bias the results.
Posted by: Heat
Is there any evidence that Piperharris is Mantanmoreland/Samiharris? Piperharris was banned as a Wordbomb sock so what's going on?
Posted by: Poetlister
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Wed 20th February 2008, 3:53pm)
No, because that's how many edits Sami and Mantan had. Including editors with fewer or more edits would bias the results.
It's not difficult to get round the bias issue, but never mind.
The point is, Mr No one, that this evidence against Sami and Mantan is very many times stronger than the evidence against me, or indeed against Taxwoman or Londoneye. So, which of the following do people think will happen?
* Sami and Mantan and all the socks are banned.
* Taxwoman, Londoneye and I are unblocked.
* The Powers that Be are completely illogical and inconsistent, let Gary Weiss off and keep us blocked.
Three guesses.
Posted by: Viridae
QUOTE(Achromatic @ Tue 19th February 2008, 7:37pm)
QUOTE(SenseMaker @ Mon 18th February 2008, 6:32pm)
I would say the blame originates with JzG, SlimVirgin, and David Gerard. They were probably in direct contact with GW/Mantanmoreland and sympathized with what he claimed was his plight.
Probably? There are several notes on Samiharris/MM :Talk pages from at least SlimVirgin asking for him to email her off wiki, to which he does - JzG also claims to have "several hundred" emails from each of them.
Add to this the farce that is Elonka coaching Matt Sanchez on "image management, the dark side of" by email, and you see that this is the modus operandi de rigeur of several elements high up within WP.
QUOTE(One @ Mon 18th February 2008, 8:12pm)
I don't think JzG is that self-aware. I think he just dimly perceives that it might look bad for him when Cla68 releases the next RfC-to-ArbCom freight train, which should result in his desysoping.
And it is quite the freight train. Why settle at a mere couple of diffs when, as of this writing, there are SIXTY TWO breaches of guidelines across six principles.
He must know about that page. The only shame is that he does, and the time Cla68 spends polishing it in the sandbox, as necessary as it will be to roll this out (cause you know its going to get ol' Jimbo's hackles up, with admonitions of "how we should thank JzG for his tireless work on WP", etc), is that it allows him to formulate his defense.
Well if he does know he is idiotically adding to the evidence by the second.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Heat @ Wed 20th February 2008, 3:57pm)
Is there any evidence that Piperharris is Mantanmoreland/Samiharris? Piperharris was banned as a Wordbomb sock so what's going on?
I'll assume you wrote that after one lager to many, lol.
No worries, you do need a program to keep up with the actors in this play so this misunderstanding is understandable.
You might try contacting David Gerard, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Piperdown.
Posted by: dogbiscuit
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Thu 21st February 2008, 2:19am)
You might try contacting David Gerard, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Piperdown.
Actually, that is a good example of Wikipediots re-writing history. DG gives himself a big let-out clause because you are not blocked for being a sock necessarily, but for being a meat puppet.
There are a couple of points: whether a casual indefinite block is appropriate, even if you had been improperly influenced in your editing, for a meat puppet. To follow on from that, was this a single purpose meat-puppet account? (I know that you were active elsewhere, so no).
But the main point is, having not ever determined you were a sock, folk-law has it that you were blocked as a sock. It appears that there was not ever the evidence to go with it, yet you appear to be assumed to be a proven sock. There are a lot of admins who casually repeat the folk-law.
Nasty business.
Posted by: Piperdown
Sportscenter Update.
Gary still playing the victim card.
Gary still pretending that Byrne doesn't have emails from Gary detailing his Mantanmoreland exploits.
Lol.
But the statistical and linguistic analysis dance goes on from the WP Arb Dream Team. Cochrane, Kardhasian, Shapiro, et al must be on slimmy's soopersekret war-room list too.
Remember, people, this is all about the slimmy as far as WP goes. Real world they'd just as soon throw gary under the bus. But on-wp, if Mantanmoreland goes, Slimmy's cred goes (like it already hasn't).
I wonder what started the Slimmy-Gary Team. Coincidental meeting on Martin-Luther-is-a-Nazi, or a chance email from slimmy to gary saying something like "That Byrne stinks. I knew him at Cambridge, and he's mean to journalists! I'm with you, Let's get him!"
But there's no doubt she regrets ever "meeting" Mantanmoreland, as it has obliterated her WP Cred.
I doubt those 1800 emails that Byrne has will stay out of sight forever. Do yourselves a favour, WP, Byrne is trying to help you, not the other way around. Despite what captured liars on WP yell, Overstock might have a wiki, but they sure ain't trying to out-wiki WP, lol, so that theory is just as much bunk as everything else coming out of JzG's Garyhotline lately.
Back at the Wikback ranch, there's a long debate going on where the WordB is putting up a good defense after being treated like a criminal. As Fiona Apple might say. I think he's been redeemed by his peers already.
What's funny to me is how WP (some of them) has a mindset like WordB is the only person who has http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15884. Others got the same treatment he did, that wasn't a one-time WP:BITEUSNEWBIES mistake.
In this case, it was shootonsight policy.
I can't wait for the media coverage....
Posted by: Aloft
I'm surprised that a clerk hasn't stepped in and asked Weiss to tone down the rhetoric. You can almost see him frothing at the mouth:
QUOTE(Weiss)
If Piperdown were targeted in this witch hunt, I am sure that this meaningless "evidence" would be used against him. Cool Hand Luke's rejoinder below, his repeated hysterical personal attacks and name calling, is typical of the tactics being used in the witch hunt that he and others are pursuing. Even if I were already strapped into the electric chair as he fondly wishes, WP:NPA would still apply. As an administrator, he should be aware of that. As a single-minded, emotional witch-hunter, he happily disregards that principle.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 20:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
That is absurdly unnecessary, because each and every element of his corporate smear campaign, financed by and undertaken on behalf of Overstock.com, has been repeated in this arbitration, making a mockery of both NPA and BLP. ... this unblock request is more and more resembling a sick joke.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 04:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
Instead, the witch hunters scratch around for "evidence" based on a fevered hunt for similarities in commas and spaces between dashes. ... The only thing that "walks like a duck" is the sheer hate emanating from some of the editors involved in this.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 03:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
The purpose of this arbitration case is not to "convince" the witch hunters to put down their nooses, but to submit evidence to ArbCom. ... If you were engaging in a serious quest for the truth and not trying to burn me at the stake you would acknowledge that those numbers are meaningless and move on.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 04:25, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
And yes, re below, I appreciate your constant references to "strands in the rope" with the noose dangling below. You've made that point before, and your repeated use of homicidal imagery is noted.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
They are being ignored, which is what makes this a witch hunt.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 04:29, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
This isn't a forest. This is meaningless statistics added to warmed-over antisocialmedia.net. User:PatrickByrne is here to give an official stamp to your witch hunt. Why not let him present the case?--Mantanmoreland (talk) 05:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
No, the "impetus" is on the witch hunters to prove that their necktie party is justified. Since the contribution histories of both myself and Sami have been conveniently ignored, and the witch hunters have found "proof" in trends that show the opposite of socking, such as not editing in cahoots with each other, there is scant to respond to.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 06:11, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
Sure. When a publicly held corporation, in this instance Overstock.com, delegates a corporate official (Judd Bagley a/k/a User:WordBomb) to a full-time stalking campaign against editors and administrators they deem unsympathetic, that inherently compromises Wikipedia. In this instance, the CEO himself engages in that campaign in this very arbitration case. Since this is a witch hunt initiated by Bagley and actively promoted by him off-site, that extraordinary action is greeted with a "thank you for contributing" by some editors here.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 04:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
... Except for one witch hunter's recent demand, ...--Mantanmoreland (talk) 04:47, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
He's quite the hysterical little bitch, isn't he? Witch hunt? Sheer hate? Repeated use of homocidal imagery?!
My eyes rolled so much I think they need new bearings. And this is from just the past 24 hours!
It would be hilarious, if only so many Wikipediots didn't fall for it. ... Nah, it's still hilarious.
Posted by: Proabivouac
I can say only that every time I personally recall having heard the term "witch hunt," the alleged sockpuppeteer was quite obviously guilty as charged.
Posted by: Piperdown
he's quite guilty. looks like the boys with the 1841 emails are giving WP a chance to do the right thing themselves first.
as for on-WP?
VARKALA.
some things you just can't explain away, not even the late great diversonary genius johnnie cochrane.
Posted by: Moulton
This story is vaguely reminiscent of one featuring a coupla characters named Narcissus and Echo. This one has yet another character named Echo Canceler.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 3:47pm)
This story is vaguely reminiscent of one featuring a coupla characters named Narcissus and Echo. This one has yet another character named Echo Canceler.
ironic, as the liar in question has been involved with http://antisocialmedia.net/?p=51 on the nets. If WP articles related to it are scoured, I wouldn't be surprised if some of Gary's socks or IP's show up.
Posted by: Moulton
In this strange Charisma War, it's hard to tell which character has the lower Charisma Score.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Aloft @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 12:06pm)
Repeated use of homocidal imagery?!
if what people have emailed me in the recent past is true, the above is ironic. there's an undercurrent to all of this that predates "wordbomb" that is particularly nasty.
as i've posted here several times, http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=13036&hl=lamborghini751, among other things. someone even edited WP recently with that alias to rub-it-in, lol.
but the imagery part? another alias used during that lamborghini751 era was "cupandsaucerwithsugar" (gary is a cat person). i've been told that on "cup"'s profile on yahoo was a photo of a stuffed bunny toy with a dagger through it, and some red staining. Why you ask? Before wordbomb, gary had a blog war with a person who was going by aliases such as "bob o'brien" and "the easter bunny". The profile photo was a message to the bunny. not very nice.
WP, you are dealing with some vile people, and they aren't the ones in utah.
after having read the Overstock lawsuit complaint that is going against gary's friends, i believe gary is particularly militant against Byrne/et al because in the suit it names "John Doe's", who i am guessing are anonymous posters to those stock message boards, and gary is one of them. so he's quite legally worried. so this isn't a simple case of critic vs criticised. this is very serious shit.
lawrence cohen, who has been a straight-talker on this MM matter so far, has fallen into the "gary is a valuable contributor on financial articles so let's let MM continue" trap.
MM isn't very knowledgeable on the financial articles he's edited so far, and that's pretty bad as his job for the last 25 years was to report on it.
Posted by: Piperdown
also, the arb hasn't even yet touched on the matter of gary and his on-WP activity against his legal nemesis, Julian Robertson. This is completely outside the gary vs overstock sphere. there's a pattern with this guy, lol.
Posted by: No one of consequence
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 4:59pm)
also, the arb hasn't even yet touched on the matter of gary and his on-WP activity against his legal nemesis, Julian Robertson. This is completely outside the gary vs overstock sphere. there's a pattern with this guy, lol.
Is there any evidence posted about that?
Posted by: Saltimbanco
It's curious that The Man of a Thousand Faces was active in Jewish-related usenet groups prior to rising to his level of incompetence at Wikipedia. I wonder if there's a Jayjg tie-in.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:24pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 4:59pm)
also, the arb hasn't even yet touched on the matter of gary and his on-WP activity against his legal nemesis, Julian Robertson. This is completely outside the gary vs overstock sphere. there's a pattern with this guy, lol.
Is there any evidence posted about that?
yes, among a lot of other evidence on fozzie's investigation page that you and others are ignoring.
QUOTE(Saltimbanco @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:26pm)
It's curious that The Man of a Thousand Faces was active in Jewish-related usenet groups prior to rising to his level of incompetence at Wikipedia. I wonder if there's a Jayjg tie-in.
no, you are now playing into what will be his'n'friends "you're anti-semites" trap. good luck with that. W-R already has a bad if unwarranted rep for that from the Twist&Shout Club of soopersekreters, and you won't do anyone any good by trying to pursue a religious conspiracy. it's a legal situation. i think gary is involved in this at a minimum because he is lashing back (for years) at byrne for byrne's legal and public attacks against his friends and colleagues. if there's more to g's motivations than that, i'll leave it up to the "deep capture" folks to prove that, but they certainly are convinced there is more to it, and since they've been suing & discovery-ing for years, i'll take that with a grain of truth for now.
Posted by: No one of consequence
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:33pm)
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:24pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 4:59pm)
also, the arb hasn't even yet touched on the matter of gary and his on-WP activity against his legal nemesis, Julian Robertson. This is completely outside the gary vs overstock sphere. there's a pattern with this guy, lol.
Is there any evidence posted about that?
yes, among a lot of other evidence on fozzie's investigation page that you and others are ignoring.
Fozzie needs to summarize it on the evidence page with a link to his own page, then make a couple of proposed findings of fact about it on the workshop. That's how to drive the process in the direction you want.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:46pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:33pm)
QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 5:24pm)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 4:59pm)
also, the arb hasn't even yet touched on the matter of gary and his on-WP activity against his legal nemesis, Julian Robertson. This is completely outside the gary vs overstock sphere. there's a pattern with this guy, lol.
Is there any evidence posted about that?
yes, among a lot of other evidence on fozzie's investigation page that you and others are ignoring.
Fozzie needs to summarize it on the evidence page with a link to his own page, then make a couple of proposed findings of fact about it on the workshop. That's how to drive the process in the direction you want.
whatever, man. when you let gary off the hook to save face for jimbo and the virgin, then the other stuff will get 'pushed' even more than it already has.
meanwhile, Crum375 just violated 3RR, and for some reason thinks gary is covered under WP:BLP, but not Judd (who gets his "BLP" violated 100's of times by TeamSlumGary on wikipedia in talk pages constantly) and Byrne.
the excuse that arb "already has it" is why this problem exists in the first place.
Arbcom is a small group of people who have the interests of a small group of people in mind, not those of the Wikipedia Community.
Arb, go ahead and let gary off the hook like jimbo told you to, so the community can go forward with applying unbiased justice.
Posted by: Saltimbanco
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 12:33pm)
no, you are now playing into what will be his'n'friends "you're anti-semites" trap. good luck with that. W-R already has a bad if unwarranted rep for that from the Twist&Shout Club of soopersekreters, and you won't do anyone any good by trying to pursue a religious conspiracy. it's a legal situation. i think gary is involved in this at a minimum because he is lashing back (for years) at byrne for byrne's legal and public attacks against his friends and colleagues. if there's more to g's motivations than that, i'll leave it up to the "deep capture" folks to prove that, but they certainly are convinced there is more to it, and since they've been suing & discovery-ing for years, i'll take that with a grain of truth for now.
Teh! You can't let someone else's irrationality sway what you think and discuss. What I wonder about is that Gary Weiss seems to get special treatment at Wikipedia ... much like Jayjg, though to a lesser degree. I suspect that there is some unstated relationship between Jimbo and Jayjg that gets Jay the kid glove treatment, and it may be that Jay extends some of his privilege to Gary out of some prior acquaintance through policing online forums against anti-semitism.
As far as religion goes, I don't care what religion they profess beyond that it may have taken them to some of the same venues where they might have met and cooperated.
Posted by: One
QUOTE(Aloft @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 12:06pm)
I'm surprised that a clerk hasn't stepped in and asked Weiss to tone down the rhetoric. You can almost see him frothing at the mouth:
QUOTE(Weiss)
If Piperdown were targeted in this witch hunt, I am sure that this meaningless "evidence" would be used against him. Cool Hand Luke's rejoinder below, his repeated hysterical personal attacks and name calling, is typical of the tactics being used in the witch hunt that he and others are pursuing. Even if I were already strapped into the electric chair as he fondly wishes, WP:NPA would still apply. As an administrator, he should be aware of that. As a single-minded, emotional witch-hunter, he happily disregards that principle.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 20:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
QUOTE(Weiss)
And yes, re below, I appreciate your constant references to "strands in the rope" with the noose dangling below. You've made that point before, and your repeated use of homicidal imagery is noted.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 03:21, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
He's quite the hysterical little bitch, isn't he? Witch hunt? Sheer hate? Repeated use of homocidal imagery?!Heh. He seems to like homicidal imagery himself. "Strapped into the electric chair" leaves no doubt that he feels like he's being killed by Wikipedia.
How emo.
Too bad FT2 was the first to write about strands and rope:
QUOTE(FT2)
In fact you're quite mistaken. The reference is not to a noose, which wasn't in my mind (but is now - cheery image... thanks) but to a statement made in a legal case I was researching a couple of years back, where the prosecutor stated that evidence must be examined individually, then taken together... one piece alone rarely provides a smoking gun either way, but many pieces together act like strands in a rope, the fact that many pieces of evidence independently point to the same or a similar conclusion renders the conclusion more likely. No one piece of evidence has the gravitas to support a conclusion, but many topgether, may do so.
You will also note that this is a case where the wikipedia policy of asssuming good faith would have been appropriate. The imagery has been merely your (mis) assumption. I am glad to correct it. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop&diff=193228056&oldid=193217908
You will also note that this is a case where the wikipedia policy of asssuming good faith would have been appropriate. The imagery has been merely your (mis) assumption. I am glad to correct it. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop&diff=193228056&oldid=193217908
Posted by: Moulton
He's behaving like a cornered animal.
Perhaps when this drama is over, he'll turn a corner, and turn a page in life.
Posted by: Piperdown
this caused a red sock alarm to go off when sami pulled this passive-aggressive act. another tendency that could probably be tracked to time of day with gary, lol.
Modus operandi - blank a well-sourced edit to provoke. Revert the revert with sock in a rigged 3RR game. Claim that you hate involved people. When stink raised, use passive-aggressive "don't be so crazy-angry" retort.
QUOTE
:If it will calm you down, go ahead and revert the link or article from a reporter that you clearly despise. I don't want to keep you up nights about this.--[[User:Samiharris|Samiharris]] 03:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Patrick_M._Byrne&diff=prev&oldid=143888418
QUOTE
If you're going to have a nervous breakdown concerning one paragraph of that article, please do it there so that other editors can read your comments.--Mantanmoreland 03:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Piperdown
in neither of these cases was my talk page edits in any way over-board, except in expansion of talking points. this is what gary does. passive-aggressive entrapment and baiting. it worked so well when with User:Ptmccain.
_____________________________
GW Herbert, the WR Hall of Famer, keeps on giving on the Evidence talk page.
- He was "up 32 hours straight"
- Bagley has admitted to being wordbomb so it's OK to violate his ass, er, um, BLP all over WP with rape imagery per Crum375, and for starting the National Front movement per other admins crazed over their friends getting caught wikilying
I think it's time some of the trainspotters compiling the JzG list just go ahead and compile a
WP:BLP violations list
So that everyone can seen just how equally Slum & Friends apply it.
______________________
JimboArbcom is now playing a game of chicken, todays Crum for Slim War was just an excuse for a convenient truth delay.
Byrne's Deep Captured Garymails to the press Vs. MM Arb outcome
Who's going to blink first?
I'd believe Byrne & Bagley about Gary writing in his emails about his book-pumping exploits on WP, and which sock edits those emails are timed with. B&B have a pretty good track record so far on who's telling the truth when show&tell time comes.
Posted by: Heat
QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 9:58pm)
He's behaving like a cornered animal.
Perhaps when this drama is over, he'll turn a corner, and turn a page in life.
Yeah right. Only if the blow is so severe and so public that it destroys his journalistic credibility aind results in Forbes dropping him and in other major publications giving him a wide berth.
Any word on when the NY Times are planning to run the story?
Posted by: WordBomb
QUOTE(Aloft @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 8:06am)
He's quite the hysterical little bitch, isn't he? Witch hunt? Sheer hate? Repeated use of homocidal imagery?!
I can assure you that what you're seeing here is pure Weiss. This is how he deals with conflict.Prior to this spasm, he had been uncharacteristically silent -- maybe even dignified -- which runs 180 degrees counter to his nature. This suggested to me that someone was telling him not to worry...that the "fix was in" and Weiss need only bite his tongue for a week or so and it would all work out.
Well, the past 24 hours tell me that Weiss is on his own at this point...behaving precisely as he'd like to be, trying to solve things his way.
And that's good news!
Posted by: Proabivouac
How much easier this would have been for him if he'd just admitted it, as I'd suggested.
Posted by: LamontStormstar
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 10:51am)
meanwhile, Crum375 just violated 3RR, and for some reason thinks gary is covered under WP:BLP, but not Judd (who gets his "BLP" violated 100's of times by TeamSlumGary on wikipedia in talk pages constantly) and Byrne.
Someone reported the 3RR violation and the hivemind found that Crum was exempt from BLP
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR&oldid=193353522#User:Crum375_reported_by_User:4.253.37.178_.28Result:_Exempt.29
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(LamontStormstar @ Sat 23rd February 2008, 12:27am)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 10:51am)
meanwhile, Crum375 just violated 3RR, and for some reason thinks gary is covered under WP:BLP, but not Judd (who gets his "BLP" violated 100's of times by TeamSlumGary on wikipedia in talk pages constantly) and Byrne.
Someone reported the 3RR violation and the hivemind found that Crum was exempt from BLP
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR&oldid=193353522#User:Crum375_reported_by_User:4.253.37.178_.28Result:_Exempt.29
I'd have found the same thing. You can't tell people that BLP reverts are exempt from 3RR, then turn around and block them. What makes this case so nauseating (besides the deception) is that Bagley and Byrne were never granted (and still aren't granted) this same consideration, turning BLP into a shield to be wielded beside the sword of malicious and false personal attacks, three capital letters woven into a fig leaf for hypocrisy. Though I'd guess that Crum acted in good faith by removing the link, it's no wonder that no one is buying it anymore.
Posted by: dtobias
That provision that BLP violation reverts are exempt from 3RR, like the similar one they keep trying to put in the BADSITES rules wherever they try to sneak them in, is a harmful one that ought to be removed. While it has a few legitimate uses, in stopping a persistent vandal using sockpuppets, it is also an invitation to edit-warring as we saw today. It shouldn't be allowed to apply in cases where multiple editors in good standing are on the opposite side of the edit war.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(dtobias @ Sat 23rd February 2008, 3:14am)
That provision that BLP violation reverts are exempt from 3RR, like the similar one they keep trying to put in the BADSITES rules wherever they try to sneak them in, is a harmful one that ought to be removed. While it has a few legitimate uses, in stopping a persistent vandal using sockpuppets, it is also an invitation to edit-warring as we saw today. It shouldn't be allowed to apply in cases where multiple editors in good standing are on the opposite side of the edit war.
Frankly, I think the whole concept of 3RR should be discarded as one more facet of Wikipedia's formal content-neutrality…but that said, even if we could agree that BLP should not provide an exemption, surely it's unfair to promise such an exemption, then block those doing it.
Former arbitrator/drone Dmcdevit, who continues to influence ArbCom through the mailing list, has now sprung to Mantanmoreland's defense, declaring him a victim of "harassment," and - for the first time - professing sympathy with those brought before the Committee.
QUOTE
And the lack of a response to the overwhelming amount of accusations is understandable. I would think you of all people would be able to relate to months of harassment on- and off-wiki, being the center of scrutiny in a sensational arbitration case generating almost more text, much of it about you personally and negative, than you can read, much less respond too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop&diff=prev&oldid=193413621
Posted by: Kato
So Crum has edit warred to the point where no evidence can be added to the Evidence Page? 
Is this the last ditch effort to save their asses. To ensure that the pages get locked?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&action=history
Posted by: Moulton
The Sum of All Fears
According to my scorecard, the http://web.media.mit.edu/~bkort/Drama.html for this one features:
• Fear of Exposure, Embarrassment, Disrespect, and DisreputeThe dramaturgical dynamics for this one have run to Tragedy, with all parties getting massive doses of what they don't want.
• Feelings of Indignation, Injustice, Alarm, Disgust, and Contempt
• Desire for Privacy, Honor, Dignity, and Respect
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 23rd February 2008, 3:45am)
So Crum has edit warred to the point where no evidence can be added to the Evidence Page?
Is this the last ditch effort to save their asses. To ensure that the pages get locked?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&action=history
i'd like to see a time analysis of Crum vs Slim edits.
Kato hit nailonhead with Crum's 10RR show yesterday. It was all about the Slimmy, not the Gary.
For some reason, Linda thinks that it isn't public knowledge by now that she and Byrne encountered each other at Cambridge, and it wasn't a pleasant one. That she ever got involved with Byrne-related WP articles is consistent with her inability to keep herself away from other personally involved topics on WP (old bosses, colleagues, professors, etc) and apply admin tools to them is just another reason why she should not be anonymously adminning on WP.
Posted by: Piperdown
Meet the Mantan, meet the Moreland,
Step right up and greet the Weiss.
Bring your socks, bring your slimmy,
Guaranteed to have the time of your life.
Because Tomstoners are really sockin' the ball,
Knockin' those home runs over the wall.
East side, West side, everysock's coming down,
To meet the M-A-N-T-A-N Moreland, of Brooklyn town.
If you've ever wondered what Matanmoreland was doing on Aug 16,2007, he found another venue to pump his book (paperback release!) on this show.
I guess after pumping his book on WP using his multiple aliases all agreeing at the same time (and emailing his buddies from his gary email account about it at the same time - I wouldn't assume Byrne is lying to you about this, WP) that his book is the toppermost, trying it again for the paperback release just wasn't feasible when it was down to just a Samiharris-Mantanmoreland show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FccvRZxsY0
gary's calm and sedate. probably did not just have a blog war with judd or an edit war on WP (this was August, a blissful time for garysocks while the SS Slimmy list got their act together, lol) yet that day. I watched a good deal of it, and kept waiting for gary to say something of any substance. I'm still waiting and the vid's over. Jeez, there's no there, there.
Note wordbomb's jab on the comments.
If I was the interviewer, I would have asked: "Gary, your book has an entire chapter on how naked short selling is a necessity to allow the market to regulate itself, yet the SEC Commissioner says it is a very serious problem that the SEC is trying to stop with Reg SHO and other efforts. Why do you think it's OK to commit finanicial crimes to prevent other financial crimes, instead of just reporting the original crimes to the regulators? Because it's very profitable to be able to enact bear raids on stocks using intra-day endless supply of sell-side pressure, combined with organized negative press coverage, and a team of people working several influential day-trader forums spreading bad rumours?"
But then I've always been a run-on sentencer, so I wouldnt get the gig.
Posted by: Piperdown
The Elephant in the Mantamoreland Arb Room.
QUOTE
WordBomb
post Sat 16th February 2008, 3:30am
Post #109
Speak for yourself. I spent three weeks of my life reading and sorting EVERY ONE OF THOSE 8,000 EMAILS.
1% were spectacular
9% were enlightening
90% were mind-numbing
However I will say this: in private email, Gary Weiss actually comes off as a human...nothing like the mouthbreather who writes his blog and edits Wikipedia as Mantanmoreland and Samiharris.
And had he not made it clear that he is in fact Mantanmoreland, I might be made to wonder.
WordBomb
post Sat 16th February 2008, 4:31am
Post #111
Clear as in "Hey look at what I just did on the Wikipedia article on naked short selling one minute ago...isn't that great?" and then you look at the edit history for the article and see only Mantanmoreland edits within several hours of the email.
Then there are many others like this: "Blah blah blah I'm Gary Weiss blah blah irrelevant irrelevant blah blah today is April 29, 2006 blah blah."
Then, examining the headers (they all came with full headers! Joy!) you see his IP address on that day was 151.202.91.28. Now, go take a look at what that tells us.
post 111 from http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15759&pid=80048&st=100&#entry80048
on his blog, Gary Moreland has declared those emails to be "forged". He's lying.
Posted by: One
I like how he knows they're forged before seeing them. But of course, Gary Weiss doesn't lie. And http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Workshop&diff=194195322&oldid=194194743, who also demands a Wiki-investigation into the forged emails.
Posted by: Random832
QUOTE(One @ Tue 26th February 2008, 7:57pm)
I like how he knows they're forged before seeing them.
Because specific claims are being openly made about the contents, and he of course absolutely never wrote any e-mails for which such claims would be valid. The better question would be, if the claims are false and he never wrote any such emails, how would he know that the e-mails exist at all; wouldn't he be claiming they don't exist at all rather than that they're forged? That he's on the "they're forged" angle _before_ the e-mails are actually published tells us that he knows they exist.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Random832 @ Tue 26th February 2008, 8:06pm)
QUOTE(One @ Tue 26th February 2008, 7:57pm)
I like how he knows they're forged before seeing them.
Because specific claims are being openly made about the contents, and he of course absolutely never wrote any e-mails for which such claims would be valid. The better question would be, if the claims are false and he never wrote any such emails, how would he know that the e-mails exist at all; wouldn't he be claiming they don't exist at all rather than that they're forged? That he's on the "they're forged" angle _before_ the e-mails are actually published tells us that he knows they exist.
actually, Gary knows they exist because according to his own blog, a reporter showed them (one? more?) to him.
and MM, pretending not to be Gary, despite IP/Varkala/Interests/Email evidence, supposedly has read Gary's blog to learn this.
So this line of reasoning that you guys are now trying to go at is off-target. there are so many more easier contradictions to point out though.
Just ban MM and his socks for abusive socking, you don't even have to pursue what we all know what Gary has been up to for 2 years, and everyone wins. The WP aspect of this is more just an embarrassment, there are a lot more larger concerns off-WP involved that WP and WP'ians shouldn't care about, and is beyond the scope of a classic sock case.
Off-WP will take care of your COI expose's for you, WP. Just get back to doing what the Durovas and Jehochmans of the WP are doing, and trying to wipe all traces of this off their reputations, lol.
Thatcher? not so much.
Enjoy this
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=88023922
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Crum375
Posted by: BobbyBombastic
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Tue 26th February 2008, 4:30pm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Crum375
Now the question is...who will lift it? Slimmy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Georgewilliamherbert? Place your bets!
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(BobbyBombastic @ Tue 26th February 2008, 9:39pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Tue 26th February 2008, 4:30pm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Crum375
Now the question is...who will lift it? Slimmy? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Georgewilliamherbert? Place your bets!
GWH. Slimmy is staying away (with her primary sock that is) due to Byrne-Slimmy COI.
Although since the guy who did the block is the guy calling the shots on the Arb, I'd say the block will stick.
Crum is a kamikaze sock and has been behaving like one for a long, long time. Prove me wrong, WP.
Posted by: BobbyBombastic
No unblock request yet or reaction on wiki from Crum yet. I can just imagine all the gmail flying around about this one.
Posted by: Piperdown
Thatcher has recused himself from the case, but not recused himself from doing what Crum's goal was all along (again), and that's to freeze the proceedings.
Odd sense of recusal that Thatcher has.
Odd sense of sockpuppet justice enforcement too.
Also....so how many times now has MM written that he is not GW, and vice versa?
Let's collect this somewhere. For laughs and reference later on.
Maybe it's just me, but anonymous civility of WP hinges on truthiness. And when you get caught lying, no one is going to trust you, your anonymity, that you won't use socks abusively, any more.
You can't WikiLove without WikiTrust, baby. I'm sure Jimbo has said something like that in one of his weird bizarre apologetic wikicrisis afterglow summaries.
Posted by: guy
I'm sure Thatcher reads WR carefully. Maybe he'd like to sign up and respond.
Posted by: Aloft
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=194288367
QUOTE
Note to clerks. I am looking at this dispute that has led to admin tools being needed. Please leave protection on, pending fuller comment. FT2 (Talk | email) 23:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Mm. Sounds ominous.
Posted by: One
If FT2 doesn't hint that Crum should be unblocked, I honestly don't think anyone will touch it for 24 hours. I think Crum's newbie-style edit warring has left everyone slack-jawed and baffled at his single-minded stupidity. Except for Mantanmoreland, that is.
This is JzG-level behavior. and seems totally beneath Slum. I would have bet serious money against him warring for a third time. It seems to waste his political capital for no discernible reason whatsoever.
Posted by: Piperdown
slimmy does some really irrational wikithings when stressed.
Posted by: WordBomb
I gotta say: that move by Crum had the hint of account suicide.
She (I've never gotten the male vibe from Crum, whoever she is) just threw that account away and saved Mantanmoreland from himself in the process.
Like a bad novel from the height of the Latin American Romanticist movement.
Posted by: jorge
QUOTE(One @ Wed 27th February 2008, 12:21am)
If FT2 doesn't hint that Crum should be unblocked, I honestly don't think anyone will touch it for 24 hours. I think Crum's newbie-style edit warring has left everyone slack-jawed and baffled at his single-minded stupidity. Except for Mantanmoreland, that is.
What do ya mean "his"- it's SlimVirgin. She's just throwing her toys out of the pram because she thought that those in the know were going to turn a blind eye to socking by sooper seekrit cabal members.
Posted by: Heat
Any possibility that Crum may be a Jayjg sock?
Posted by: jorge
QUOTE(Heat @ Wed 27th February 2008, 1:14am)
Any possibility that Crum may be a Jayjg sock?
Nope, not unless he is an expert on plane crashes.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(One @ Wed 27th February 2008, 12:21am)
think Crum's newbie-style edit warring has left everyone slack-jawed and baffled at his single-minded stupidity…I would have bet serious money against him warring for a third time. It seems to waste his political capital for no discernible reason whatsoever.
Not everything people do is politically motivated. For my part, I wasted tons of "political capital" defending some rather unpopular people, and I don't regret a thing. It seems probable that Crum sincerely feels the "pyschopath" link is over the top and shouldn't be there, and is willing to take the hit to stand up for that principle, or just to stand up for his/her friend.
Mind you, I personally disagree with the removal of the link, not the least because Mr. Weiss had already turned Wikipedia into an attack farm against Mr. Bagley and Mr. Byrne. There is some value not only in the truth, but in teaching RWI-attackers and their would-be imitators a lesson.
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Wed 27th February 2008, 1:45am)
QUOTE(One @ Wed 27th February 2008, 12:21am)
think Crum's newbie-style edit warring has left everyone slack-jawed and baffled at his single-minded stupidity…I would have bet serious money against him warring for a third time. It seems to waste his political capital for no discernible reason whatsoever.
Not everything people do is politically motivated. For my part, I wasted tons of "political capital" defending some rather unpopular people, and I don't regret a thing. It seems probable that Crum sincerely feels the "pyschopath" link is over the top and shouldn't be there, and is willing to take the hit to stand up for that principle, or just to stand up for his/her friend.
Mind you, I personally disagree with the removal of the link, not the least because Mr. Weiss had already turned Wikipedia into an attack farm against Mr. Bagley and Byrne.
then slummy ought to take a gander at what is linked to under [[Gary Weiss]]'s EL to the Weiss Blog. That piece of work has been "attacking wikipedian" Byrne for 2 years with terminology that make psychopath look tame.
Byrne doesn't even speculate on how many balls GW has, under an anonymous name.
Byrne hasn't been sued by Weiss, you'll note.
Let Slummy go through every WP edit they and their friends, all the way up to Jimmyhat, made about what "psychopaths" and such that Byrne and his company are according to them. Get it?
People want consistency of treatment on WP.
Overstock/Byrne/Bagley should sue Jimmyhat back to the porn age, but they're nice guys trying to give WP a chance to right the wrongs instead,imo. And WP is stepping up and replacing these dishonest admintyrants with honest editors. Good for them and for WP. And Byrne's boys are already a bit busy suing Gary's friends already.
Posted by: Piperdown
and WP, know this:
Samiharris = Mantanmoreland
They aren't meatpuppets or editing buddies.
It is the same guy, from the same PC. But keep on wanking on WP and finding any excuse you can to save Gary's Mantanmoreland account, lol.
Just keep on ignoring what the WordB tells you. Keep on ignoring the IP's. It's worked out so wonderfully for you in the past.
WordB isn't forging IP screen shots or emails, lol.
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Wed 27th February 2008, 1:52am)
That piece of work has been "attacking wikipedian" Byrne for 2 years with terminology that make psychopath look tame…every WP edit they and their friends, all the way up to Jimmyhat, made about what "psychopaths" and such that Byrne and his company are according to them. Get it?
Yes, that's what I'm saying.
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Wed 27th February 2008, 2:14am)
Samiharris = Mantanmoreland
They aren't meatpuppets or editing buddies.
It is the same guy, from the same PC.
Absolutely.
Posted by: dogbiscuit
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Wed 27th February 2008, 1:45am)
Not everything people do is politically motivated. For my part, I wasted tons of "political capital" defending some rather unpopular people, and I don't regret a thing. It seems probable that Crum sincerely feels the "pyschopath" link is over the top and shouldn't be there, and is willing to take the hit to stand up for that principle, or just to stand up for his/her friend.
It seems typical Slum modus operandi: WP rules and rulings do not apply to them. It wouldn't surprise me to see a Crum post along the lines of "I am being WikiStalked and harassed on this ArbCom therefore I will no longer read the talk pages and simply edit as I see fit." This will shortly be followed by "Don't add anything to the evidence page without discussing and gaining consensus on the talk page first."
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
So how long before this entire farce is thrown out because it can't be proved that any wrongdoing has taken place?
I give it 36 hours. If any talk of the real world is ruled out, then nothing can be shown.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
Should get interesting soon, the protection has just been lifted and Slimmy starts to post...
She seems to be suggesting WordBomb created SamiHarris to attack Mantanmoreland.
Posted by: One
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Wed 27th February 2008, 9:55pm)
Should get interesting soon, the protection has just been lifted and Slimmy starts to post...
True that. She just removed http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&curid=15760264&diff=194510946&oldid=194509993 which would be a legal threat from a non-super admin.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Wed 27th February 2008, 3:55pm)
She seems to be suggesting WordBomb created SamiHarris to attack Mantanmoreland.
Not necessarily. The wording is a little unclear, and perhaps deliberately deceptive (this is Slimmy, after all). But either way, and assuming this is even true in the first place, it's just as likely that Mr. Wordbomb set himself up with Proxify.com to get WP to block as many Proxify IP's as possible, so that Weiss would start getting IP-block messages which would hopefully "spook" him into switching to another service - not so much to annoy him, but rather to use the change as confirmation (of a sort) that the Proxify AnonIP's had been Weiss. Difficult to say... The fact that it caused some confusion among the WP ranks (who, to be fair, probably weren't really all that interested for the most part) would have just been an added bonus.
That's not to say it actually worked though, since Slimmy's evidence here would indicate that Weiss didn't abandon his Proxify account, at least not right away. We know now that the CheckUser results suggest that they were (and perhaps still are) both using that same service, but only because they've told us - Wordbomb wouldn't have been privy to those results then, obviously.
I'd have to assume that back in Nov. 2006, Mr. Wordbomb was still (to put it politely) trying to figure out the most effective strategy for achieving his (presumably) main goal, which was to expose User:Mantanmoreland as Weiss. That would probably have included a few tactics that either wouldn't have worked, or might be likely to have backfired on him at a later date. There's no handy manual for this sort of thing, after all. (I keep threatening to write one...)
QUOTE(Slimmy @ Feb. 27, 2008)
In February 2008, MM and Samiharris were checkusered. Samiharris was found to have been using the same open proxies from proxify.com, which were subsequently blocked. A number of these had been used in November 2006 to make attacks on MM, including posting a sockpuppet tag to his user page, and posting on AN/I to ask that he be investigated for sockpuppetry. It's therefore assumed that these IPs were used by WordBomb or a supporter.
Of course, another possibility might be that Weiss was using Proxify IP's to "harass" himself, so as to maintain the general atmosphere of Wordbomb-related paranoia that was being peddled on WP at the time. That seems a bit less realistic, but to be honest, none of this has seemed particularly realistic since Day One, at least in my opinion.
Posted by: Somey
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Sat 23rd February 2008, 3:10pm)
...trying it again for the paperback release just wasn't feasible when it was down to just a Samiharris-Mantanmoreland show.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FccvRZxsY0
gary's calm and sedate. probably did not just have a blog war with judd or an edit war on WP (this was August, a blissful time for garysocks while the SS Slimmy list got their act together, lol) yet that day. I watched a good deal of it, and kept waiting for gary to say something of any substance. I'm still waiting and the vid's over. Jeez, there's no there, there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FccvRZxsY0
gary's calm and sedate. probably did not just have a blog war with judd or an edit war on WP (this was August, a blissful time for garysocks while the SS Slimmy list got their act together, lol) yet that day. I watched a good deal of it, and kept waiting for gary to say something of any substance. I'm still waiting and the vid's over. Jeez, there's no there, there.
I finally managed to watch this snoozefest, and while I wouldn't recommend it for entertainment value, there was one part that gave an interesting insight into Weiss's motives and general attitudes - about halfway in, the interviewer (who's almost as unintelligible as Weiss is, sound quality-wise) makes the point that dirty dealings on the stock market mainly affect rich people, as opposed to "common middle-class folks." Weiss disagrees though, bringing out the largely-bogus "50 percent" figure for the percentage of US citizens who own stock.
While that figure may be technically accurate, the idea that half the United States is actively engaged in stock trading on a daily (or even weekly) basis, to the point where the regular sale of stock becomes a significant income source for them, is simply preposterous. The vast majority of stockholders in the US are people who don't even "dabble" - they simply own a few shares of something, quite often as part of a mutual fund or some other managed investment, which they're sitting on as a long-term "nest egg" or what have you.
The interviewer tries to argue (politely) with him, to the effect that the number people directly affected by various stock scams and lack of proper regulation must still be quite small, and that most of them must still be fairly wealthy - but Weiss just shrugs him off.
Posted by: jorge
SV and her goons have obviously been desperately racking their brains to see what excuses they can come up with- this is a very lame one indeed. Pity that Mr Weiss made http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=16091&view=findpost&p=81701....
Posted by: Proabivouac
QUOTE(jorge @ Wed 27th February 2008, 11:11pm)
…this is a very lame one indeed..
I'm afraid I must agree.
If they only knew how badly they're damaging their reputations, for a completely lost cause, in the service of one who tricked and used them.
Even if ArbCom did let MM/SH off the hook - frankly, difficult to envision (though they've surprised me before) - it wouldn't end there. That Mantanmoreland = Samiharris = Tomstoner = LastExit = Gary Weiss has already been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Others outside Wikipedia will be looking at this, and will not be bound by ArbCom in drawing their conclusions. All that remains to be demonstrated is who can see this clearly, and be honest about what they see, and who can't and/or can't.
Posted by: D.A.F.
They're using the word ''credible'' evidence. Would this word not be interpreted as well as there may be fabrication of evidence and can not be trusted? ''Valid'' evidence would be a more proper term.
Posted by: BobbyBombastic
Old Gary just doesn't have the same guts as Slimmy does. Even he says, "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=194545753#SlimVirgin.27s_evidence":
QUOTE(Mantanmoreland)
WordBomb accuses me of doing things he does himself. Thus engages in multiple sockpuppets, so he accuses me of that. One thing he did was accuse me of being User:Tommytoyz, who took a far different view of naked short selling than myself. It is possible that he was engaged in the same activity with Samiharris, but I think that is a long shot.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
And in case you missed it, Gary apparently does not have sources to support hishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#.22harassment_campaign_by_executives_of_Overstock.com.2C_including_its_CEO.22 and has decided to cite the ultimate sources:
Arbcom and SlimVirgin!
QUOTE(Mantanmoreland)
The "harassment" part is straight out of an Arbcom decision.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites#AntiSocialMedia.net. But seriously, if you feel this is a BLP issue, please make that case. We will then need to be sure to revisit all of the numerous, blatant BLP violations spread over at least five and maybe more pages.--Mantanmoreland (talk) 18:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=194215922#.22harassment_campaign_by_executives_of_Overstock.com.2C_including_its_CEO.22
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=194215922#.22harassment_campaign_by_executives_of_Overstock.com.2C_including_its_CEO.22
QUOTE(Mantanmoreland)
SlimVirgin's evidence below, in discussing a February 8 email from Judd Bagley http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#WB_says_he_will_remove_posts_if_Weiss_is_bannedshould remove any doubts that this case is part of the Overstock.com smear campaign against its critics. Bagley, as director of communications of a public company, can be presumed to function in his corporate capacity in all of his actions concerning Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence&diff=prev&oldid=194541735
New York Times? Old hat. The Register? A fucking rag. Arbcom and SlimVirgin?
Reliable as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punxsutawney_Phil.
Posted by: Kato
The "evidence" presented by Georgewilliamherbert is predictably hilarious. And it includes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Georgewilliamherbert
QUOTE(Georgewilliamherbert)
Editors/admins here have been "drawn offsides" by WB before
See for example Cyde's falling for Bagley's attacks on Slim Virgin from last summer [203] and the antisocialmedia.net page that started that The Skinny on SlimVirgin's Sockpuppetry. General conclusion was that significant effort had been made to combine some true data with other false data and present ultimately unsupportable conclusions of abuse. Numerous arbcom members felt that Cyde should be sanctioned, though that ultimately did not happen.
See for example Cyde's falling for Bagley's attacks on Slim Virgin from last summer [203] and the antisocialmedia.net page that started that The Skinny on SlimVirgin's Sockpuppetry. General conclusion was that significant effort had been made to combine some true data with other false data and present ultimately unsupportable conclusions of abuse. Numerous arbcom members felt that Cyde should be sanctioned, though that ultimately did not happen.
WB is Wordbomb (why the hell do you people use so many acronyms, how much longer does it take to write Wordbomb than WB?)
Is this Herbert seriously suggesting that http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Sweet_Blue_Water wasn't http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=next&oldid=153459981#SlimVirgin.27s_sockpuppet.28s.29? Or that it wasn't used to vote twice on an afd (an act that has seen other editors banned by Slim herself)?. For crying out loud.
Posted by: SenseMaker
QUOTE(Kato @ Thu 28th February 2008, 6:25am)
The "evidence" presented by Georgewilliamherbert is predictably hilarious. And it includes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Georgewilliamherbert
QUOTE(Georgewilliamherbert)
Editors/admins here have been "drawn offsides" by WB before
See for example Cyde's falling for Bagley's attacks on Slim Virgin from last summer [203] and the antisocialmedia.net page that started that The Skinny on SlimVirgin's Sockpuppetry. General conclusion was that significant effort had been made to combine some true data with other false data and present ultimately unsupportable conclusions of abuse. Numerous arbcom members felt that Cyde should be sanctioned, though that ultimately did not happen.
See for example Cyde's falling for Bagley's attacks on Slim Virgin from last summer [203] and the antisocialmedia.net page that started that The Skinny on SlimVirgin's Sockpuppetry. General conclusion was that significant effort had been made to combine some true data with other false data and present ultimately unsupportable conclusions of abuse. Numerous arbcom members felt that Cyde should be sanctioned, though that ultimately did not happen.
WB is Wordbomb (why the hell do you people use so many acronyms, how much longer does it take to write Wordbomb than WB?)
Is this Herbert seriously suggesting that http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=User:Sweet_Blue_Water wasn't http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=next&oldid=153459981#SlimVirgin.27s_sockpuppet.28s.29? Or that it wasn't used to vote twice on an afd (an act that has seen other editors banned by Slim herself)?. For crying out loud.
Yeah, I got confused by that too. Sweet Blue Water was clearly a sockpuppet of SlimVirgin's. Maybe SlimVirgin is telling people in private emails that the Sweet Blue Water accusations are fabricated and others are buying it??? SlimVirign sockpuppeted and was caught after the fact. That is a fact that is very well established. I think that maybe this Georgewilliamherbert fellow is just incompetent and a bumbler. That might be the simpler explanation.
I do think it reflects badly on SlimVirgin that she so transparently pushed the purposefully deceptive "explanation" that WordBomb is Samiharris. It just reminds people that SlimVirgin likes to spin tall tails that suit her purposes.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FWorkshop&diff=194586740&oldid=194586280
Posted by: SenseMaker
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Thu 28th February 2008, 2:08pm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FWorkshop&diff=194586740&oldid=194586280
To me the case is pretty clear cut at this point. Varkala is a big deal.
Posted by: No one of consequence
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Thu 28th February 2008, 2:08pm)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration%2FMantanmoreland%2FWorkshop&diff=194586740&oldid=194586280
By itself it is nothing, I agree. But it certainly seems to be the tipping point, or smallest circle in a Venn diagram (Jr. High math, here I come). When considering the universe of potential editors, there may be many who are interested in naked short selling and Overstock.com's allegations in this area; somewhat fewer who would also promote Weiss; fewer still who are also interested in Tombstone, Ariz; and even fewer who are also interested in the situation of Jews in India. By the time you get to Varkala (both as a topic and the time shift), it seems that the subset of wikipedia editors who would share all these characteristics must be very small indeed.
Posted by: thekohser
QUOTE(Kato @ Thu 28th February 2008, 1:25am)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Georgewilliamherbert
QUOTE(Georgewilliamherbert)
General conclusion was that significant effort had been made to combine some true data with other false data and present ultimately unsupportable conclusions of abuse. Numerous arbcom members felt that Cyde should be sanctioned, though that ultimately did not happen.
Is this Herbert seriously suggesting...
Here's my take on what may be happening in George William Herbert's mind. Perhaps he's adopted the Wikipediot Model of Fact and Error Refinement (WP:MF'ER). He enters an argument with one view of things, already firmly established in his mind. Any fact or presentation that supports that view, he also supports as "conclusive" or "obvious" or "widely-held".
Any fact or presentation (or even tone of voice or spelling error) that does not support his view, he rejects as "contentious" or "trolling" or "false data".
With WP:MF'ER, the loyal Wikipediot can justify in his mind virtually any position on any argument!
Greg
Posted by: Kato
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 28th February 2008, 3:38pm)
Here's my take on what may be happening in George William Herbert's mind. Perhaps he's adopted the Wikipediot Model of Fact and Error Refinement (WP:MF'ER). He enters an argument with one view of things, already firmly established in his mind. Any fact or presentation that supports that view, he also supports as "conclusive" or "obvious" or "widely-held".
Any fact or presentation (or even tone of voice or spelling error) that does not support his view, he rejects as "contentious" or "trolling" or "false data".
With WP:MF'ER, the loyal Wikipediot can justify in his mind virtually any position on any argument!
Greg
Good post Greg. That seems to be an accurate analysis. I've been fascinated by Herbert for six months or so, ever since I started noticing his jaw droppingly stupid posts to Wiki-en list.
When Piperdown's block was re-examined recently, Herbert wrote that Piperdown was a sockpuppet of Wordbomb based on his "duck test" some 10-15 times in just one debate alone. He actually claimed "the duck test" was policy! Even though a cursory glance at the sockpuppet charges made this highly unlikely at best. Yet having made up his mind before hand, probably through extraordinary gullibility, he relentlessly banged the drum in the face of overwhelming evidence.
It is interesting watching how these people, who are so clearly wrong about almost everything, slowly shift positions when the truth hits them in the face. Like Oil Tankers in the sea they labor and struggle to shift their course.
While JzG is a classic example of this, and far more obnoxious in his wrong-headedness, Herbert is so hoplessly wrong so much of the time, often comically, that I often wonder what is going in on in his psyche? And as I think I've written before, how on earth did he manage to find himself in such a position within the Wiki-establishment? He's like the George W Bush of Wikipedia, where you just wonder how? I mean, he didn't seem to know how to format a [[:Category]] when he was commenting on one page I saw recently.
Posted by: The Wales Hunter
Er, has anybody noticed what's going on with Arbcom? Looks like MM/GW will be told not to edit the articles again and that's it.
Posted by: Kato
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Fri 29th February 2008, 7:36pm)
Er, has anybody noticed what's going on with Arbcom? Looks like MM/GW will be told not to edit the articles again and that's it.
Please see http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=16126
Posted by: Jonny Cache
QUOTE(Kato @ Thu 28th February 2008, 12:00pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 28th February 2008, 3:38pm)
Here's my take on what may be happening in George William Herbert's mind. Perhaps he's adopted the Wikipediot Model of Fact and Error Refinement (WP:MF'ER). He enters an argument with one view of things, already firmly established in his mind. Any fact or presentation that supports that view, he also supports as "conclusive" or "obvious" or "widely-held".
Any fact or presentation (or even tone of voice or spelling error) that does not support his view, he rejects as "contentious" or "trolling" or "false data".
With WP:MF'ER, the loyal Wikipediot can justify in his mind virtually any position on any argument!
Greg
Good post Greg. That seems to be an accurate analysis. I've been fascinated by Herbert for six months or so, ever since I started noticing his jaw droppingly stupid posts to Wiki-en list.
When Piperdown's block was re-examined recently, Herbert wrote that Piperdown was a sockpuppet of Wordbomb based on his "duck test" some 10-15 times in just one debate alone. He actually claimed "the duck test" was policy! Even though a cursory glance at the sockpuppet charges made this highly unlikely at best. Yet having made up his mind before hand, probably through extraordinary gullibility, he relentlessly banged the drum in the face of overwhelming evidence.
It is interesting watching how these people, who are so clearly wrong about almost everything, slowly shift positions when the truth hits them in the face. Like Oil Tankers in the sea they labor and struggle to shift their course.
While JzG is a classic example of this, and far more obnoxious in his wrong-headedness, Herbert is so hoplessly wrong so much of the time, often comically, that I often wonder what is going in on in his psyche? And as I think I've written before, how on earth did he manage to find himself in such a position within the Wiki-establishment? He's like the George W Bush of Wikipedia, where you just wonder how? I mean, he didn't seem to know how to format a [[:Category]] when he was commenting on one page I saw recently.
Speaking of Dubya, some old timer once told me that Lame Duck is really a euphemism for Limp Dick. This seems both conclusive and obvious to me, if not exactly widely-known.
Jonny
Posted by: Random832
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Fri 29th February 2008, 7:36pm)
Looks like MM/GW will be told not to edit the articles again
If you think that, you aren't reading it closely enough.
Posted by: Jonny Cache
QUOTE(Random832 @ Fri 29th February 2008, 2:52pm)
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Fri 29th February 2008, 7:36pm)
Looks like MM/GW will be told not to edit the articles again
If you think that, you aren't reading it closely enough.
Even if so, it would only mean that he would have sleightly more trouble editing the affected articles under his previous two proxies.
Jonny
Posted by: written by he who wrote it
QUOTE(The Wales Hunter @ Fri 29th February 2008, 7:36pm)
Er, has anybody noticed what's going on with Arbcom? Looks like MM/GW will be told not to edit the articles again and that's it.
nah, they left a loophole big enough to let MM continue editing them with his current account:
QUOTE
Any current or future editor who, after this decision is announced, makes substantial edits to naked short selling, Overstock.com, Patrick M. Byrne, Gary Weiss, or closely related pages is directed: ... To disclose on the talkpage of the relevant article(s) any circumstances (but not including personal identifying information) that constitute or may reasonably be perceived as constituting a conflict of interest with respect to that article. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mantanmoreland/Proposed_decision#Editors_restricted
(emphasis added)
so if the circumstance that creates a conflict of interest is that he's Gary Weiss, then he doesn't have to disclose that.
Posted by: Piperdown
Sock Update for the W-R.
Keep in mind these were abusive socks. With deceptive intent. Often to double vote, create false consensus, and tag team folks who don't have a Jayjg-esque posse' at their backs.
Mantanmoreland - the Head Dick, still going strong on WP. Blocked for 2 weeks, which is like suspending an American Baseball pitcher for 4 days (starting lineup pitchers play once every 5 days and rest for 4 days between). More wristslapping for show from the rotten core of WP.
Samiharris - he burned so brightly, so boldly, and went out on his own terms. Sort of. Sammy was Gary's cat per his usenet (a-choo!) contributions.
Tomstoner - Samiharrris's less agressive and more clueless incarnation. Old alkies shouldn't make fun of stoners. The dude abides, man.
EmilyWelles - what the fuck. Lol.
LastExit - Not the last sock to exit in brooklyn from Gary's PC. It was really hard to carry on a self-menage-a-trois, so gary just kept it to a manageable dynamic duo sockshow the next time.
Bassettcat - possibly a sequel to Sammi Cat in real life, and now a sequel to Samiharris on WP.
I think Gary's blog is still linked to from his WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. It's hilarious, and a laughing-at-you-not-with-you kind of way. yikes.
Posted by: Rootology
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Wed 28th May 2008, 7:52pm)
The dude abides, man.
Sorry, this made me laugh. I finally saw that movie for the first time on Monday... killer. "WE BELIEVE IN NOFFING!!!"
Posted by: Piperdown
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 2:31pm)
he's quite guilty. looks like the boys with the 1841 emails are giving WP a chance to do the right thing themselves first.
as for on-WP?
VARKALA.
some things you just can't explain away, not even the late great diversonary genius johnnie cochrane.
I wonder if Word-B's posting tonite is alluding to those pending 1841 emails.....
Var-kal-a, O Var-kal-a.
I just like that word.
Posted by: Milton Roe
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Thu 29th May 2008, 3:53am)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 22nd February 2008, 2:31pm)
he's quite guilty. looks like the boys with the 1841 emails are giving WP a chance to do the right thing themselves first.
as for on-WP?
VARKALA.
some things you just can't explain away, not even the late great diversonary genius johnnie cochrane.
I wonder if Word-B's posting tonite is alluding to those pending 1841 emails.....
Var-kal-a, O Var-kal-a.
I just like that word.
Just for the hell of it, I once looked at the edits out of IP address of DTC building from which MM/GW allegedly edited, and found one to a Bengali newspaper, actually posted in the Bangla language. So somebody there knows Bangla, and I figured that was the wife maybe. However, West Bengal (up by Bangladesh, same root) is about as far away from Kochi and Varkala as you can get. And Weiss's wife wife claimed to publish in the Pioneer of India, which is in English not Bangla, and is published in places like Kochi and Delhi, and not particular the Northwest. So that person at the DTC is probably somebody else. The whole thing should be unraveled someday, if MM ever gets here. We can sit around the lounge and laugh about whether the detective work was defective work or not.
Varkala. Yeah, fun.
Posted by: Piperdown
the subtopic wording of this wonderfully named (cavalcade, i love it) thread needs "DoRight" replaced with "Bassetcat".
ALthough I think DoRight is Gary, some folks who have much better sleuthing skilz says he/she ain't.
After all, I am neck and neck with clouseau when it comes to bumbling sleuthing. Lugash is pleasant this time of year though....
Posted by: Moulton
Shouldn't that be: Gary Weiss and his CamelCase of Sox ?