Sir Fozzie's investigation, a proper sockpuppet report Options

[Proabivouac]

G-dett and Cool hand Luke's sections draw attention to idiosyncratic "phraseologies" shared by both Mantanmoreland and Samiharris accounts, with Alanyst providing edit time analysis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzi...igation/Sandbox

This looks promising, to say the least. What is needed is more of the same. Such evidence, in combination with a plausible motivation scenario, was enough to convict Oldwindybear straightaway, and, after much strife, convince ArbCom in the SevenOfDiamonds case:

I bear no ill will towards Mantanmoreland/Samiharris. The few interactions I've had with him were entirely positive, and several of his friends I would call mine as well.

But as the evidence approaches the overwhelming - as I sadly imagine it will - the deception that has been foisted upon the project, up to the very highest levels of authority, and the questions of corruption which inevitably follow from its recognition…well, this is serious stuff, folks. There's a lot of money and more than one real-life reputation riding on these issues. A serious shake-up is in order - blocking one retired sock isn't remotely sufficient. Anyone who might reasonably be expected to have known about this should be very closely examined.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

[Peter Damian]

G-dett and Cool hand Luke's sections draw attention to idiosyncratic "phraseologies" shared by both Mantanmoreland and Samiharris accounts, with Alanyst providing edit time analysis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzi...igation/Sandbox

I ran an enhanced version of the Damian DIY checkuser as follows. Get up to 5000 edits from each user.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...=Mantanmoreland

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rget=Samiharris

copy and paste these as VALUES into separate columns of a spreadsheet. Trim head and tail.

enter the formula =value(left(CELL,5)) into the spreadsheet, where CELL contains the first edit of one user. Copy down. Likewise for the other user. This calculates the timestamp string as a day fraction. Sort each of the day fraction columns, then add a column to the right, numbering the rows from 1 to 5000 (or the actual number of rows, whichever is smaller).

Then chart an x-y graph with the day fraction as x, and the number as y.

Then you get a 'snake' shaped graph, which flattens out as the user makes fewer edits, and steepens as he or she makes more.

The two graphs for Mantanmoreland and Samiharris are highly similar. Both stop editing at 5:30 UCL and resume 13:00. Rapid editing until 17:00, but a pretty consistent pace until 5:30.

Strongly suggests the same user, based in eastern US, subject to the limitations we discussed in an earlier thread. (It may simply mean there are two different users with similar editing patterns).

What is the background to this case, please?

[Piperdown]

G-dett and Cool hand Luke's sections draw attention to idiosyncratic "phraseologies" shared by both Mantanmoreland and Samiharris accounts, with Alanyst providing edit time analysis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzi...igation/Sandbox

I ran an enhanced version of the Damian DIY checkuser as follows. Get up to 5000 edits from each user.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...=Mantanmoreland

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rget=Samiharris

copy and paste these as VALUES into separate columns of a spreadsheet. Trim head and tail.

enter the formula =value(left(CELL,5)) into the spreadsheet, where CELL contains the first edit of one user. Copy down. Likewise for the other user. This calculates the timestamp string as a day fraction. Sort each of the day fraction columns, then add a column to the right, numbering the rows from 1 to 5000 (or the actual number of rows, whichever is smaller).

Then chart an x-y graph with the day fraction as x, and the number as y.

Then you get a 'snake' shaped graph, which flattens out as the user makes fewer edits, and steepens as he or she makes more.

The two graphs for Mantanmoreland and Samiharris are highly similar. Both stop editing at 5:30 UCL and resume 13:00. Rapid editing until 17:00, but a pretty consistent pace until 5:30.

Strongly suggests the same user, based in eastern US, subject to the limitations we discussed in an earlier thread. (It may simply mean there are two different users with similar editing patterns).

What is the background to this case, please?

They both post from the same Verizon IP in Brooklyn, NYC, NY, USA.
The older account has revealed his own previous socks through editing gaffes, two of which were quietly shown the door on the same day in 2006. And Arbcom did it with Checkuser proof then too.
The socking is always abusive - consensus illusion, 3RR evasion, double voting
The abuser has returned to the same abuse, although this time used a proxy for sock#2. Most of the time.

Next case please.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Moulton]

In the real world of writing traditional encyclopedias, everyone knows who the authors and editors are. The sales force also know who the customers are.

In the bizarre world of Wikipedia, the game of concealing and revealing the identity of the players becomes more important than the purported goal of writing an authentic encyclopedia, or serving the consumer of the product.

It's astonishing how much technical work people have put in to address the bizarre world of Wikipedian anonymity. In the world of real encyclopedias, such games of concealing and revealing the identity of editors would never occur.

[Piperdown]

In the real world of writing traditional encyclopedias, everyone knows who the authors and editors are. The sales force also know who the customers are.

In the bizarre world of Wikipedia, the game of concealing and revealing the identity of the players becomes more important than the purported goal of writing an authentic encyclopedia, or serving the consumer of the product.

It's astonishing how much technical work people have put in to address the bizarre world of Wikipedian anonymity. In the world of real encyclopedias, such games of concealing and revealing the identity of editors would never occur.

I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified.

I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP.

But it is for the admins and management of WP. There's not that many, they should be accountable, and their ID veirfied and presented.

It's what real publishers do.

The editors can continue the MUD games, but the admins who run the joint are the ones doing the real damage. WP has no credibilty has long as you have anonymous COIs, and outed COIs like Jossi, lol, being allowed to do the voodoo they do.

Daniel Brandt has a WP:POINT and I have seen his light, hallelujah.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Piperdown]

The amazing G-Dett http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/G-Dett has found another "asked and answered" used in another completely independent thread/time. He is good, very very good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=190360171

Who is PTMcCain?

I read his history and it looks oh so familiar to my tilting at MantanWindmills. How many of us have gone through this schtick with Gary? How many have been ralilroaded? PtMcCain was Shanghai'ed, big-time.

He managed to raise a stink, I was a well-behaved ass kisser in comparison. If I would have known I was going to be banned out of the sweet blue for...nothing...I would have pulled a serious PtMcCain (or Giano) on the way out.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[WordBomb]

What is the background to this case, please?

Best place to start is here.
Then read this.

As you'll see in the next few days, the number (and positions) of people who have known about this is shocking.

As if that's not bad enough, they've spent the past 570+ days calling me a liar for raising the alarm of this fraud.

[Piperdown]

What is the background to this case, please?

Best place to start is here.
Then read this.

As you'll see in the next few days, the number (and positions) of people who have known about this is shocking.

As if that's not bad enough, they've spent the past 570+ days calling me a liar for raising the alarm of this fraud.

Do they still have an attack dog BLP of you, and are they still using "fuck off Bagley" all over WP? That's not nice.
Daniel Brandt Deja Vu.

[Piperdown]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...igation/Sandbox

This is just rich.

Slrubenstein comes in to say he doesn't care. It's good he cared so much to do that.

Why does Slrube care?

He was the Gerard Lackey who "reviewed" my unblock (original) request in Sept 2007 (see my user talk page link on my WR profile) with a "you just questioned Gerard's Vice Godkingness. How dare you, knave! You stay banned! Nevermind I didn't bother to investigate a damn thing except what my Vice Godking told me in the two minutes I took on this."

I think that about sums up the knee deep bullshit that is slrube almost as well as he shows for himself on the diff at the top 'o this post.

And nice work, Daniel T. You are a good man, even when you sometimes overlook the facts in some cases (yes, Daniel, there is an SEC Commissioner, and he did say "Naked short selling is a problem we are very concerined about" - see the NSS article where I managed to get that in there between getting sock 6RR'ed) in order to play the Rodney King role.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Piperdown]

Some kind W-R'ian please jonnycache or save SirFozzie's wonderful sandbox, at regular intervals.

Da GodKing will probably roll over and smash it after all the lilliputians get tuckered out.

And I got slrube confused with sandstein. 2 equally but different (far as i know) shallow lochs. Slrubenstein is one of the "I got your back" posse of gary's on WP, and sandstein was just some patsy Gerard drafted to put on a sham appearance of a block review.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Achromatic]

I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified.

I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP.

It's a good point. I remember when Amazon introduced the "Real Names" scheme, and it was amazing how night-and-day comments and reviews became. Be it positive, or negative, your input gained so much more value (granted, that's a relative judgment, based on what the original was), by virtue of the fact you were willing, in a public fora, to do the mind-boggling and put your name to it. Especially in such a place where there is a real value in COI, as I believe there is in WP. From publishers, authors, fans and critics trying to organize groundswells of opinion, through to religious ideologies/cults whitewashing what they can to seem more benevolent, there is something that can be had of it.

If Amazon can do it, and do it successfully, why can't WP? Hell, even institute rules (moreso than there are) not allowing you to dismiss other contributors on the basis of your qualifications, but at least real names have value in accountability.

But then, that wouldn't allow the inner circle to easily edit on their favorite closet subjects, from big chested girls to pro-pedo/zoo to adult diapers to, well, you name it. So it won't happen.

[Piperdown]

When the going gets tough, the tough go whip out old socks and post from separate IP's to put on a cu show.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

WordB, what's the over/under on DoRight. Funny how and when he pops up. He'll make a fine sleeper account with longtime cred and the usual friends to grow back into the sharkstooth hole.

A quick visual on DoRight vs Mantanmoreland shows another case of Alternating Timelines.

But DoRight would be the oldest account of any of the socks, so that is a new twist. I think it's a friend not a sock, but I was proved wrong with sami too.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Amarkov]

I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified.

I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP.

It's a good point. I remember when Amazon introduced the "Real Names" scheme, and it was amazing how night-and-day comments and reviews became. Be it positive, or negative, your input gained so much more value (granted, that's a relative judgment, based on what the original was), by virtue of the fact you were willing, in a public fora, to do the mind-boggling and put your name to it. Especially in such a place where there is a real value in COI, as I believe there is in WP. From publishers, authors, fans and critics trying to organize groundswells of opinion, through to religious ideologies/cults whitewashing what they can to seem more benevolent, there is something that can be had of it.

If Amazon can do it, and do it successfully, why can't WP? Hell, even institute rules (moreso than there are) not allowing you to dismiss other contributors on the basis of your qualifications, but at least real names have value in accountability.

But then, that wouldn't allow the inner circle to easily edit on their favorite closet subjects, from big chested girls to pro-pedo/zoo to adult diapers to, well, you name it. So it won't happen.

Real name policies don't help. It's one thing if you want to wave around credentials, of course. But what if I just want to edit, and don't particularly care to be accountable? Well, then I claim to be a random person from San Jose, and who can prove me wrong? (I've done that before, obviously.) Even better, since my ISP allocates IP addresses over a wide range, I could create sockpuppets over the entire Southwest.

And it's relatively easy to consider that "LegoMan 156" and "Dragonwarrior9" could be the same person. Will anyone think about whether "Andrew Q. Smith, Las Vegas bellhop", and "Enrique Gonzalez, accountant in Phoenix" are really one and the same?

On Amazon, you must use your actual name; your credit card can't sockpuppet for you. That is the only reason why it works there.

This post has been edited by Amarkov:

[Piperdown]

what is being talked about here in the amazon example is where your account gets a "Real Name" stamp from the site owner, and I think it's done by signing up with credit card information. Which would have to be real and not an alias in two different cities unless you're up to something illegal, lol.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Achromatic]

what is being talked about here in the amazon example is where your account gets a "Real Name" stamp from the site owner, and I think it's done by signing up with credit card information. Which would have to be real and not an alias in two different cities unless you're up to something illegal, lol.

Exactly. There is verification in place. Though, it also strikes me with another (not that they wouldn't think of plenty) reason it'll never happen on WP, "Discrimination against minors/those of us counter-culture rebels who refuse to enable Visa and Mastercard", etc. (Not that I think it's a perfect way, smells slightly of sites that want your CC no 'to verify age'...)

[WhispersOfWisdom]

what is being talked about here in the amazon example is where your account gets a "Real Name" stamp from the site owner, and I think it's done by signing up with credit card information. Which would have to be real and not an alias in two different cities unless you're up to something illegal, lol.

Exactly. There is verification in place. Though, it also strikes me with another (not that they wouldn't think of plenty) reason it'll never happen on WP, "Discrimination against minors/those of us counter-culture rebels who refuse to enable Visa and Mastercard", etc. (Not that I think it's a perfect way, smells slightly of sites that want your CC no 'to verify age'...)

Finally more sites are requiring the essence of what you are talking about, including MySpace.

My problems with WP stemmed from the fact that anyone could open an account with my name on it, and claim they are me. Any one of us can still do that of someone else.

I want nothing to do with WP and it took nearly a year to get out of there. I asked, politely, on Jimbo's talk page; NYB deleted the account with my name on the door. I still do not know how to log into an account there, with my name on it. Verification is a good thing. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Amarkov]

Well, yes, they could demand to check your credit card. Amazon has no problem with that; they need your credit card to sell you stuff anyway.

But Wikipedia isn't selling you stuff. What excuse do they have for seeing your credit card?

[WordBomb]

It's a good point. I remember when Amazon introduced the "Real Names" scheme, and it was amazing how night-and-day comments and reviews became. Be it positive, or negative, your input gained so much more value ...

To bring the conversation full-circle, here's what I discovered about Gary Weiss and Amazon.com book reviews. I suspect anybody following this issue will find many, many parallels.

Warning: it's a long post, and all the reviews mentioned in it were mysteriously and simultaneously deleted the same day it was published, so most of the links to Amazon are broken. But because the original text is cited in the body of the post (which is why it's so long), you'll not miss anything.

Irony Alert: Jimbo had this to say to Cla68 in reference to his decision to delete the AfD debate on Gary Weiss's article autobiography:

Cla68, I very much disagree with you about this. The page contained wildly inappropriate speculation that a notable author was sockpuppeting. As I am sure you are aware, many authors have had their careers badly damaged by being caught sockpuppeting at Amazon, etc., and it is deeply wrong for people to ask me to restore a page with such speculations in Wikipedia after the claims have already been investigated and dismissed.

In case you missed it, that debate has been re-created here.

This post has been edited by WordBomb:

[Piperdown]

Well, yes, they could demand to check your credit card. Amazon has no problem with that; they need your credit card to sell you stuff anyway.

But Wikipedia isn't selling you stuff. What excuse do they have for seeing your credit card?

Bentheadvocate did something today to fend off a sockhunt involving a long ID string on WP. Not familar with what that is or how much weight it carries. I'll post about it on the "Ben Wakes Up to Poop on Toast" thread.

[WordBomb]

Well, yes, they could demand to check your credit card. Amazon has no problem with that; they need your credit card to sell you stuff anyway.

But Wikipedia isn't selling you stuff. What excuse do they have for seeing your credit card?

Amarkov makes a great point here. As soon as credit cards enter the picture, you must meet "PCI Security Standards" which adds a degree of complexity that would make it impractical for a .org.

I suspect the answer is to have some third party that does nothing but pass a token to non-commercial sites vouching for a user's credit card-verified identity. Let them take care of PCI compliance for everybody else.

Let them also find a sustainable revenue model (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif) .

This post has been edited by WordBomb:

[WhispersOfWisdom]

^ This, of course, is the reason why KNOL and MSFT/Yahoo will eventually have the WP timeline and database of articles and search plains all drawn and quartered. Wikia is a bit late to the party and, in fact, probably could have had a shot at some of the designs that are now going to take hold. I said a long time ago that the players with deep pockets are going to win. The big money is going to be in the deal-making for the duration. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif)

[Proabivouac]

From Alanyst and Cool Hand Luke:
"removing/rv/rev duplicative text/language/etc."

User:Mantanmoreland:

"removing duplicative text"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=68617733
"rv duplicative language"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=70308282

User:Samiharris:

"…removing duplicative italicized matter…"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=181194364
"self-rev duplicative cite"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=177221628

User:Tomstoner:

"removing duplicative comments and reply"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=45852319
"removing comments -- duplicative of posting on talk page"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=53771228

[Moulton]

I said a long time ago that the players with deep pockets are going to win.

It takes both deep pockets and deep ethics to win in the long run.
Google is far from perfect, but it takes the ethics challenge seriously.

[The Wales Hunter]

He's trying to use technicalities to get out of it!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191023475

[Kato]

According to Morven, Mantanmoreland has a good case to see the Rfc removed...

lack of an actual dispute is and has always been reason to decertify and delete an RFC.

Lack of an actual dispute? Did he just say "lack of an actual dispute"? I think he did? No, surely not... He did? (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...rd#Improper_RfC

[The Wales Hunter]

You're not the only one who is sitting here, stunned at the moment. Mantanmoreland is now claiming there is no dispute to be resolved...amazing.

[Kato]

My God. He did say "lack of a dispute". Morven actually wrote a whole paragraph along these lines on the rfc. Below, Morven discusses the most bitter and long running dispute in the history of Wikipedia, where details of gross malpractice by the named party have just been revealed only sentences earlier on the page..

Where's the dispute? RFCs are supposed to be a means of resolving an actual issue. I don't see an actual dispute being described here, and would suggest that the filers need to have an actual dispute with the users against whom they're filing to have standing.

Without such a current dispute, this is an unnecessary accusation against two established users whose current conduct is not apparently being called into question. Moreover, since Samiharris has indicated he has left the project, there appears to be no ongoing issue that will be remediable.

...completely out of his depth... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

[Achromatic]

My God. He did say "lack of a dispute". Morven actually wrote a whole paragraph along these lines on the rfc. Below, Morven discusses the most bitter and long running dispute in the history of Wikipedia, where details of gross malpractice by the named party have just been revealed only sentences earlier on the page..

Where's the dispute? RFCs are supposed to be a means of resolving an actual issue. I don't see an actual dispute being described here, and would suggest that the filers need to have an actual dispute with the users against whom they're filing to have standing.

Without such a current dispute, this is an unnecessary accusation against two established users whose current conduct is not apparently being called into question. Moreover, since Samiharris has indicated he has left the project, there appears to be no ongoing issue that will be remediable.

...completely out of his depth... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/tongue.gif)

Apropos of anything else, isn't standard procedure to get rid of both puppet and master, as a matter of principle?

[Somey]

My God. He did say "lack of a dispute". Morven actually wrote a whole paragraph along these lines on the rfc.

It makes sense for Gary/MM though, seen in perspective. The dispute is between Overstock.com and Weiss - as long as User:Mantanmoreland and his various other accounts maintain the fiction that they're not Weiss, then he has to claim that the dispute has nothing to do with User:Mantanmoreland and his various other accounts, farcical though it may appear to everyone else.

Morven, though... that's a pretty stupid move on his part. This is probably not the time to be taking over the steering wheel in Gary's little bumper-car ride.

As for the rest, I hate to sound like Devil's Advocate, but I still doubt that Weiss has done anything illegal, or even legally actionable in a realistic sense. People like Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass, and other journos who have filed false news stories, were clearly in violation of their terms of employment, which are usually signed contracts and have provisions for recovery of damages by the employer, etc. I doubt that Gary would have had to sign anything for Forbes.com or Portfolio Trade Publishing stating that he wouldn't promote himself by using multiple accounts on Wikipedia and then lying about it. I wonder if they would even care, to be honest.

I'd still have to say the big loser here is Wikipedia. Particularly if it's true that we're about to see over a thousand e-mails purporting to be from Gary in which he mentions (brags about, perhaps?) his WP editing activities, published by even a semi-reputable source. If I were SlimVirgin, JzG, Dave Gerard, or Jimbo, I'd be absolutely livid over that - they put their WP reputations (or notoriety, if you prefer) totally on the line for this guy, supporting him to an almost ludicrous extent, and he repays them by chattering about it via e-mail with people he doesn't even know personally? Hell, if I were doing what he's being accused of, I wouldn't tell a living soul, unless I had a psychiatrist, which I don't. (Yet... (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/unsure.gif) )

I suspect we'll hear a lot of the predictable "but e-mails can be easily forged" sort of talk from these folks in the very near future.

[The Wales Hunter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191038401

It seems to me that if serious allegations are going to be made, they should be made in the right forum, which is obviously SSP. I'm a longtime editor and I don't think this is a terribly unreasonable point to raise. -- Mantanmoreland

[Proabivouac]

Morven, though... that's a pretty stupid move on his part. This is probably not the time to be taking over the steering wheel in Gary's little bumper-car ride.

This can't be the same Morven who hunted me down for having a new username without having previously grovelled before the Committee? Who, after 10k edits, a clean block log, a perfectly respectable reputation, multiple nominations for adminship and no active disputes (unless he, too, was adminpuppeting for Elonka?) made up non-existent policies to justify his RWI trolling? And here he is making up more nonsense to defend an long-term pattern of blatantly abusive socking.

Morven reasons:

"Moreover, since Samiharris has indicated he has left the project, there appears to be no ongoing issue that will be remediable."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191027809

Um, no, nice try…User:Samiharris is still editing the project as User:Mantanmoreland.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

[The Wales Hunter]

MONGO has agreed with Morven's view (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[LamontStormstar]

Um, no, nice try…User:Samiharris is still editing the project as User:Mantanmoreland.

They said one of them used proxies and then they said they blocked all the proxies so whoever was using proxies likely had to stop editing as their proxies were all getting blocked.

[The Wales Hunter]

Um, no, nice try…User:Samiharris is still editing the project as User:Mantanmoreland.

They said one of them used proxies and then they said they blocked all the proxies so whoever was using proxies likely had to stop editing as their proxies were all getting blocked.

Although they did manage to "retire" from Wikipedia. So unless somebody turned a blind eye, they must still have access to proxies.

[Achromatic]

Although they did manage to "retire" from Wikipedia. So unless somebody turned a blind eye, they must still have access to proxies.

Or they didn't use a proxy. And would have left behind a CU'able IP address. (Well, no, most likely, he went down to Starbucks). Cause otherwise, that'd be awkward.

[Viridae]

Although they did manage to "retire" from Wikipedia. So unless somebody turned a blind eye, they must still have access to proxies.

Or they didn't use a proxy. And would have left behind a CU'able IP address. (Well, no, most likely, he went down to Starbucks). Cause otherwise, that'd be awkward.

I asked a checkuser to check on that one - would either find another proxy to block or possibly (but highly unlikely) an address that matanmoreland has previously used. ~~~~

[Proabivouac]

MONGO has agreed with Morven's view (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

I guess that's the only way to defend his wikially at this point, since no remotely reasonable third party who's examined the situation would say that Mantanmoreland ≠ Samiharris.

Look, MONGO, I like Mantanmoreland too, and often agree with him in wikidebates. He stuck up for me a few times, and I appreciated it, and remembered it. On reflection, that's probably the reason I didn't take a closer look at this sooner.

But let's face it 1) this kind of activity is dishonest, corrupt and wrong 2) He's stone cold busted. There's no way out now. Even if Wikipedia were to let him off the hook at first, a la Essjay, it won't go away. Really, should it?

Morven's favoritism in this whole affair, involving many millions of dollars in real people's real money, and which significantly predates this RfC, is more than sufficient cause to seek (at least) his resignation. Morven helped fix Wikipedia to discredit Bagley- who, let's not forget, was telling the truth - and protect Weiss, who was lying through his teeth to protect his COI editing sockfarm, while bearing false witness against others by calling truthtellers liars and harassers.

Mantanmoreland abused the harassment meme to suck honest people, some of whom have actually been real-world harassed (and unjustly,) into protecting him from the consequences of his dishonesty.

And all the while Morven shilled for this game, while harassing (by Wikipedia's own definition) others and exposing them to defamation (by any standard) on the webpages he manages.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

[Kato]

Jimbo writes on Wikiback

Just to follow up.

I have my own opinions and beliefs, which I have expressed publicly and privately depending on where that might be appropriate. But me wondering about something enough to conduct a thorough investigation personally is not the same thing as "knowing".

To this date, I have seen no convincing proof that Mantanmoreland is Gary Weiss. I have seen a lot of bluster and nonsense from people I don't trust. I have followed a lot of blind alleys. But I have no proof.

You'd have to be an idiot not to conclude that Mantan is almost certainly Gary Weiss after sifting through the WP diffs (many edits to Overstock, N-Shorts, Gary Weiss bio, articles on obscure mafia history etc etc) and Gary Weiss's blog / career (which has been obsessed with the very same topics down to his writing a whole book on the history of The Mob). Not conclusive proof, I know. But if you're not prepared to take Overstock's word on any of this, then just look it up yourself and see what I mean.

I'm not following the later part of the Wikiback thread where Wales apparently admitted in private that Mantan was Weiss back in September 2007. A fact Wales alternatively describes as "nonsense conspiracy theories" whenever else he can. Could somebody expand on that, or find a link which discusses it?

* edited to fix a link - Nathan

[Kato]

Mantanmoreland abused the harassment meme to suck honest people, some of whom have actually been real-world harassed (and unjustly,) into protecting him from the consequences of his dishonesty.

Well yes. This has been the problem all along. Manipulative characters have maneuvered people like JzG, Herbert and MONGO to beat the drums and whip "the community" into a frenzy of hate against outsiders like Judd Bagley for their own gain. These clueless tubthumpers don't have the capacity to discern what is really going on here, while the community at large is made up of malleable nerds with absolutely no idea about the world at all. The result: gross public miscarriage of justice that drags Wikipedia further into the mire. We told them this long ago, but to quote Jonny Cache, "all we got for our troubles was a constant stream of spit in our faces".

Cool Hand Luke's post to Wikiback sums up the whole thing well:

This is outrageous. God damned outrageous. And the moment I read the date, I remembered noting Mantanmoreland's puzzling withdrawal from Overstock articles mid-September. See here.

Meanwhile, we banned a user (Piperdown) for merely suggesting what Jimbo thought was probable. Meanwhile, I've been busting my butt to show that they're sock puppets (believing it fruitless to convince anyone of the COI issue), when in fact it was a damn open secret.

Look, I've got school work to do, and I should have gone to bed hours ago, but this is the most outraged I've ever been at Wikipedia, and I've seen my share of absurdity and abuse during the four years since I signed up for an account. (Feb 7, 2004 anniversary. Didn't even notice.) You're telling me that black is white. That WordBomb was right the whole time, and everyone sort of suspected it.

I hope that community heads roll.

Goodnight.

[Proabivouac]

Just to follow up.
I have my own opinions and beliefs, which I have expressed publicly and privately depending on where that might be appropriate. But me wondering about something enough to conduct a thorough investigation personally is not the same thing as "knowing".

Talk about "wikilawyering."

[Error59]

If Weiss had any balls, he would wait until SirFozzie, Luke, FT2 and all the others had spent a further few hundred hours sifting contributions in irreducible detail, and then say in big flashing letters "yes, I am behind Samiharris and Mantanmoreland", making all their comprehensive work pointless. He's basically done for on Wikipedia at this point anyway.

[The Wales Hunter]

A problem here is that if Mantanmoreland admits he has been socking or (which won't happen) he admits he is Weiss, then he knows he's fucked. Because from there on in, any edits to the articles involved by new editors will be reverted as "socks of Weiss" (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[Poetlister]

Mantanmoreland is now claiming there is no dispute to be resolved...amazing.

It's scarcely a new tactic. When Admin NLU called for moderation between RachelBrown and Lulu/SV, Lulu said that there was nothing to mediate and SV said she hadn't been involved.

[The Wales Hunter]

Jimbo has now been reported to AN/I regarding the "Weiss/Mantanmoreland" comment on the Sekret list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191112350

[Piperdown]

The elephant in the room - Yesterday Wikipedian user:PatrickByrne announced on his site that among thousands of emails between journalists, internet forum "bashers", money managers, and other...ahem..."sources", lol......., there are 1841 emails from Gary Weiss, many admitting to his editing of Wikipedia. Since the emails are with other people that are also involved in the Byrne saga, it's safe to assume that editing of WP means editing of WP articles in question.

And Mantanmoreland should be banned for Tomstoner/Lastexit alone, regardless of samiharris.

And no one has brought up Doright yet on WP. You should.

Now we have SlimVirgin/GeorgeWilliamHerbert lying on wikback/WP about screen shots, Morven putting up a Johnnie Cochrane routine on WP, and JzG beating the crazy drum again.

Mantanmoreland's Obi Wan Kenobi impression "These are not the socks you want, move along" [waves hand] is quite endearing.

And Byrne's saga is going to be going reliable source public - yet a small circle of morons on WP, and their godkingm, is going to just keep up the same lie until they get made to look very foolish in the media. Again.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Piperdown]

If Weiss had any balls

Ironically, ask Mantamoreland and his calvacade how many balls they think that Patrick Byrne has. This is an outside joke.

NEWSFLASH - The Magician Reveals A Secret
February 12th, 2008 by Patrick Byrne

...one from within the network of Bad Guys got in touch with me and turned over 8,000 emails from a set of message board bashers, convicted stock swindlers, and financial journalists in their cahoots...All total shysters. They run up through sometime well into 2007.

....I know that I have them legally, and that the person who gave them to me had them legally as well (I’d just start posting the 8,000 emails and let the world decide, but I want this journalist to get the scoop).

What makes for fun reading are the several thousand emails of those well-known New York financial journalists. Understanding how they operate, and with whom, will be the stuff of textbooks someday.

Among those communications are 1,841 emails from a bent reporter named Gary Weiss. Among many other things, in several of those emails Gary Weiss freely discusses his editing of Wikipedia.

...we now also have incontrovertible proof of this also) that while Jimbo Wales has for months been publicly accusing Judd of being a “stalker” and such, Jimbo Wales has known all along that Gary Weiss was indeed using the sockpuppets that Judd has revealed. In other words, Jimbo knew that Judd was right, but he has been lying through his teeth to his own followers.

Again, I am stating this publicly here so that this evidence (including the emails of journalists), can be attributed to me, so that a good journalist can go ahead and publish without fear of legal repurcussion.

http://community.overstock.com/deepcapture...veals-a-secret/

[thekohser]

I didn't think I'd ever have anything to do with Weiss/Overstock/WordBomb/Bagley, but thanks to WAS 4.250, now I do! I feel so important!

:[[User:Durova|<span style="color:#009">Durova</span>]], there is a ''lot'' more to it than that. For starters, there is an entire WAR that has been going on for two years that could have been avoided if COI in a nice friend had been taken as seriously as COI in Greg K. [[User:WAS 4.250|WAS 4.250]] ([[User talk:WAS 4.250|talk]]) 13:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

In other words, it's kind of like what I've been saying for about 17 months now. Why was Wikipedia Review a serious conflict of interest (editing for pay in the disinfecting sunlight), when the Reward Board wasn't any conflict of interest, and thousands of "follow" links to Jimbo's for-profit Wikia site wasn't any conflict of interest?

I'm fine if they slaughtered my attempt to start a business, if they would have also shut down the Reward Board and applied the actual "WP:External Links" policy to Wikia links.

That's what Guy Chapman never got through his thick skull. I wasn't hell-bent on editing Wikipedia for payment. I was hell-bent on the equal application of the WP:COI policy (that only came into existence after the advent of Wikipedia Review). I guess that will be my Wikipedia legacy. Were it not for my business, WP:COI would not have been born when it was. Now, it's one of the most complex problems facing the entire project.

Greg

This post has been edited by thekohser:

[WordBomb]

I didn't think I'd ever have anything to do with Weiss/Overstock/WordBomb/Bagley, but thanks to WAS 4.250, now I do! I feel so important!

That's funny...I felt important being mentioned (or at least referred to) in the same comment as you. It's like the Grand Unified Theory of COI...bringing all forces together in a singular moment of wikiality.

[Piperdown]

my first take on the Kohsers activity on WP when I first ran into - gee, that's not right, that shouldn't be allowed on this snowwhite-pure no-COI site. Then I saw Greg's link to the "Reward Board" and thought "holy hypocracy, batman!".

Then I read articles on WP on companies, people, and though "Holy mother of god, these are not only awful, they're unprofessional, often anonymously autobiographical, and open to be vandalised at any time".

Then I thought, hmm. Maybe people like Greg should be editing them (openly, with any COI's disclosed on his user page, and without him having any administrative privilege ala a Jossi), getting his reward board mojo on for it, and if he does anything "wrong", the community could slap his hand and fix it.

I don't think even Greg's "boss's article" would be involved, lol. Greg, have you considered joining a "church", becoming their paid press official, and editing WP for them? I hear it pays real good.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[The Wales Hunter]

Response:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191141059

I agree with Morven concerning this RfC, but there seems to be no consensus to delete this and put it in SSP where it belongs. Also Samiharris has quit the project, so this is moot.

I am not Samiharris, and neither I nor Samiharris have ever been blocked or even warned. There are no accusations of edit warring, and the POV pushing accusations come from Cool Hand Luke, who has been a partisan and aggressive editor in [[Patrick M. Byrne]], removing sourced material from the New York Times, claiming that a notable Times columnist, [[Joseph Nocera]], is an "advocacy" and not a reliable source[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patrick_M._Byrne&diff=186656781&oldid=186166391]. He had an extensive but civil exchange with Samiharris on that point, in which he continued stubbornly to his POV position.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Patrick_M._Byrne#WEIGHT_and_Nocera]

Cool Hand and the others pushing this rely on statistics, because we have not ''behaved'' as socks. The section above is a good example. If I was Sami, would not I have chimed in in this faceoff between Sami and an administrator? A consensus was needed, and I could have supplied a consensus. I did not, because I have been trying my best to avoid all of these articles because of a steady drumbeat of off-wiki harassment, originating from an official of Overstock.com who is a banned user.

Similarly, I did not chime in when Samiharris was facing off against Cool Hand and others in Talk:Gary Weiss last December. In fact, I checked that Talk page and I have not one edit there while Sami has many. If we were socks, I'd be all over that talk page and the article.

Also our writing style is different, and I posted some diffs concerning that here [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SirFozzie/Investigation/Sandbox#Evidence.2FDiscussion.2C_Section_4_Writing_Style].

[Piperdown]

gary is sami is mantan is tomstoner is lastexit is doright and they all post from the same PC from a brooklyn hell hole. the lies roll on, he hasn't stopped.

somebody ask him about his uncle, his tomstoner, etc.

if he says "asked and answered", ask him why he and samiharris are editing from the same computer. Maybe he thinks they're different people inside of his head.

also ask him if he's "having a nervous breakdown" and "being kept up nights" like he tried to provoke me.

then ask him what his excuse will be when Byrne's email stash goes public.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[Aloft]

I am not Samiharris, and neither I nor Samiharris have ever been blocked or even warned.

He's never been warned? There's a diff on that very page of him being warned for sockpuppetry by Fred Bauder. Come on Gary, not even Wikipedians are that gullible. Except for maybe JzG.

[The Wales Hunter]

The RFC looks like it's turning towards real-life identify and Wordbomb has been offered an apology by one editor on the ANI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191149777

[The Wales Hunter]

Tomstoner blocked as sockpuppet

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=190330664

Last exit blocked as sockpuppet

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=116446964

Reasoning:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191172184

[Piperdown]

Tomstoner blocked as sockpuppet

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=190330664

Last exit blocked as sockpuppet

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=116446964

Reasoning:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191172184

there has to be some way we can tie in the Muppet Show to all this. There's Fozzie(bear), MissLipstickonaPiggy, a bunch of Muppets, etc.

[One]

This is moving really fast. I usually have something to add, but I can't keep track of it all. We have administrators who spontaneously and independently called for the ban of all Mantanmoreland accounts. We have administrators calling Jimbo's behavior "outrageous."

Meanwhile, the sockiness of Samiharris has turned out to be great acid test for the so-called cabal. SV, JzG, GWH: "DUCK, what DUCK?"

[The Wales Hunter]

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=190868364

Samiharris blocked as sock of Mantanmoreland (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

[One]

I have a bad feeling about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_tal..._Mantanmoreland

Looks like it could only let the deniers ignore the evidence by saying: Look, they talked at the same time! no matter how marginal their dialog is.

[The Wales Hunter]

Agreed. He'll get away with it. Someone like Weiss has clearly got friends who would post for him from one of the accounts. Laptop next to him, different IP, telling him what to type.

[Piperdown]

Agreed. He'll get away with it. Someone like Weiss has clearly got friends who would post for him from one of the accounts. Laptop next to him, different IP, telling him what to type.

durova puts up a softball for buddy gary to knock out of the park. this isn't a foreign concept to gary, and he probably suggested it to durova in their recent email exchanges. and they have been emailing each other as durova already said on-WP.

it's a great way to fool people, and WP'ians should see if for the staged nonsense that such an experiment would be. i am shocked gary just didn't do this (get a friend) to perform samiharris all along. that's what I thought was going on since i first ran into this nightmare last spring. even jossi and slim are smart enough to get friends to meatpuppet with.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[WordBomb]

Agreed. He'll get away with it. Someone like Weiss has clearly got friends who would post for him from one of the accounts. Laptop next to him, different IP, telling him what to type.

What makes this so strange is the fact that it's not like there's a lack of consensus and that this sort of stunt is needed to break a log-jam.

Who's seriously defending Mantanmoreland anymore? Are they willing to extend this sort of test to every future case? Will they offer it retroactively to every disputed past case?

Here's the real challenge: Will Gary Weiss allow himself to be put on a live *shudder* webcam for the whole hour?

[Piperdown]

here's a clue, WP'ians, and for a growing part of this, they are learning it....don't involve the following people in making any defintive decisions on this matter - witness, yes, decide, no:

Thatcher
Jimbo
FloNight
Fred
Slim
Jay
JzG
Gerard

There is a cast of thousands who can look at this case that haven't had their reputations on the line in seeing it go away. Many are and that's good.

and when those User:PatrickByrne stashed emails come out, "many involving Wikipedia", don't be surprised if the loudest screamers on-WP are the biggest hypocrites off-wp. I know I can't wait for the 8000 emails to come to light. Don't tease us too long, PB.

if i was a nastypedian, I'd preemptively fess up. save your account reputations now, lol.

[WhispersOfWisdom]

A kids version of peek-a-boo. How lame.

Anyone else on earth would have been banned, deleted, and gone months ago.

How can anyone at WP still look at this and keep a straight face.

The whole scene is very 6th grade. I should know... I have a a sixth grader, have had two other 6th graders, and I WAS a sixth grader. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif)

[The Wales Hunter]

It's reached Arbcom. About the fifth venue in 24 hours!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...#Mantanmoreland

[Piperdown]

It's reached Arbcom. About the fifth venue in 24 hours!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...#Mantanmoreland

mistake for all "sides". arbcom are a small number of people who are mostly compromised already by this. they are going to come out of this badly either way.

it should have been "community ban" of all accounts and fuckall who was behind them would have been the easy way out of this for everyone, and the real world part of this will get its due off-WP anyway. Arbcomming isn't going to help that now.

all this arbcom will succeed in doing is exposing the arbcom for the sham that it is. a small starchamber of voices echo'ing jimbos.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[One]

Yeah, I suspect ArbCom will produce something mutually unacceptable. I doubt they would contradict the 30-odd RfC signers and declare them sock-free, but we won't see a launching pad into a broader inquiry--certainly not when one or more of the parties needing scrutiny sits on ArbCom itself and doesn't feel the need to recuse.

[thekohser]

I have a bad feeling about this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_tal..._Mantanmoreland

Looks like it could only let the deniers ignore the evidence by saying: Look, they talked at the same time! no matter how marginal their dialog is.

That's strange -- "my" sockpuppet Orgatrope and I were never given this "two simultaneous conversations test" offer from Durova.

Greg

[WhispersOfWisdom]

In the real world of writing traditional encyclopedias, everyone knows who the authors and editors are. The sales force also know who the customers are.

In the bizarre world of Wikipedia, the game of concealing and revealing the identity of the players becomes more important than the purported goal of writing an authentic encyclopedia, or serving the consumer of the product.

It's astonishing how much technical work people have put in to address the bizarre world of Wikipedian anonymity. In the world of real encyclopedias, such games of concealing and revealing the identity of editors would never occur.

I agree. Ironically, I don't think I should be allowed to edit one of the largest sites in the world, and usually the #1 google result for any subject or person, unless I did so under a real name, verified.

I sometimes cheat on my true love Byrne and shop the Amazon. If you want to slag on something there, and be take n seriously, you have to sign up under a verified identity. I think a credit card. I realise that is not possible for many outside the UK/US, or practical for the number of people that edit WP.

But it is for the admins and management of WP. There's not that many, they should be accountable, and their ID veirfied and presented.

It's what real publishers do.

The editors can continue the MUD games, but the admins who run the joint are the ones doing the real damage. WP has no credibilty has long as you have anonymous COIs, and outed COIs like Jossi, lol, being allowed to do the voodoo they do.

Daniel Brandt has a WP:POINT and I have seen his light, hallelujah.

[u]


^ The reality 101 class that most of the kids at WP refuse to take.

I must say the stock of WR is rising like a Phoenix from the dust in all of this.

[LamontStormstar]

Most of gary's socks use famous people's real names. Pretty big connection. The socks also always use wordbomb's real name on wikipedia just like gary does in his blog.

Gary basically admits reading Wikipedia Review in his blog:

"Bagley no longer pretends that he is "director of communications" -- he rarely signs off on press releases -- and spends most of his days posting to an anti-Wikipedia website."

Direct link: http://garyweiss.blogspot.com/2008/02/depa...y-goodness.html

If Gary Weiss really had nothing to do with his Wikipedia Reivew, he'd not write that. Now let's see if he proves it further by deleting it.

[Cedric]

Well, well! Isn't this precious!:

The quote above is misleading to whatever extent it is construed as me "admitting" or "knowing" that Mantanmoreland is Gary Weiss. In the quote itself, I am clearly expressing a belief that I held at that time. (I forget now just what prompted me to hold that belief at the time, or to voice that belief in that context, although as I remember it, it was in the context of an attempt to get Mantanmoreland to prove the opposite to me if he would.)

I have to date seen no proof (nor even persuasive or convincing evidence) that Mantanmoreland is Gary Weiss. Whether it is true or not, I do not know. What I current believe about it is not really at issue, since we do not ban people (or prevent their bans) based on hunches that I might have.

Also this from the AN page:

My saying at one point that I believed Mantanmoreland to be Gary Weiss is not a smoking gun or anything like one. They are apparently trying to spin this was me "knowing" and "lying" about it. The truth is that I do not know, I have my suspicions like anyone might, but there is no proof and I have tried (hard) to get proof.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Nevertheless, you must have had good reasons for a rather strong statement like that one. I for one would appreciate further, detailed explanation as to what exactly those reasons were, and also (equally important) who else can reasonably be assumed to have had those reasons available to them at or around the time you made that statement. User:Dorftrottel 12:02, February 14, 2008

If there were absolutely no grounds for suspicion whatsoever, then Bagley would not have been able to so successfuly exploit such suspicions. The fact remains that there is no proof, and there never has been. I would say that everybody here is by now so invested in one interpretation or another that ArbCom is probably the only venue for resolution of this matter. Guy (Help!) 12:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Naturally, Guy swallows Jimbo's "clarification" whole. Who's "wikilawyering" now?

It is true that suspicion does not equal proof. Not in a court of law, anyway. But since when was that true on Wikipedia? Never that I have seen. Yet more proof that on WP, some editors are definitely more equal than others.

Maybe we should start a pool as to what date and time we can expect Jimbo's inevitable non-apology apology concerning his "mistake in judgment", and his hippy-dippy "only love can make us whole" statement.

Ugh!

[Piperdown]

jimbo blanked the Fall 2006 [Gary Weiss] AFD debate where he stated that the "matter had been investigated and the allegations are false", to paraphrase, as I recall recently seeing that uncloaked dagger. Liar.

I can't wait for the 1,841 emails, lol.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[The Wales Hunter]

But Jimbo admitting he had suspicion at least is something. Though it does probably cover himself and if (ha ha ha) Arbcom rule anything like we would like them to, he can brush it off as "bad judgement" - if GodKing would dare do that!

Further to the above:

My saying at one point that I believed Mantanmoreland to be Gary Weiss is not a smoking gun or anything like one. They are apparently trying to spin this was me "knowing" and "lying" about it. The truth is that I do not know, I have my suspicions like anyone might, but there is no proof and I have tried (hard) to get proof.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:36, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

* Nevertheless, you must have had good reasons for a rather strong statement like that one. I for one would appreciate further, detailed explanation as to what exactly those reasons were, and also (equally important) who else can reasonably be assumed to have had those reasons available to them at or around the time you made that statement. User:Dorftrottel 12:02, February 14, 2008

* If there were absolutely no grounds for suspicion whatsoever, then Bagley would not have been able to so successfuly exploit such suspicions. The fact remains that there is no proof, and there never has been. I would say that everybody here is by now so invested in one interpretation or another that ArbCom is probably the only venue for resolution of this matter. Guy (Help!) 12:40, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

It's an interesting thought - yes, there is suspicion, I don't think anyone is denying that. For example, a post from Gary Weiss's blog saying how he has been in India for "the past few weeks" dated October 17 2006. It would be interesting if those who have been going through edits and compiling graphs could compare Mantanmoreland's edit times for the few weeks prior to that blog post and see if the times are significantly different to what is normally seen Whitstable 14:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[Piperdown]

what's my smoking gun, among many, is Varkala

MM edited that obscure Indian town's article. The edit was out of "character", and months later the Wonderful Weiss wrote a Forbes piece with a byline from that town.

Riddle me this, WP'ians. Based on edit history, nevermind that Judd knows what the IP's were and can prove it.

Who else has the following negative, obscure, biases and interests in common?

Julian Robertson (sued Weiss, and MM+socks fought toothnail to keep BusinessWeek material on it out of BLP - there are 2 or 3 articles related to Robertson on WP that his socks went AFD on)
Patrick Byrne
The Naked City (TV series) -- "film noir" material
Judd Bags
Varkala
Russ Baker
Business Journalism, specifically Pump&Dumps can best be vigilante policed by abusive stock trading

1,841 Emails originated by GW that Byrne has obtained and stated that some of them detail Wikpedia activity he did. Which I know many on WP are waiting with baited breath to see. I've got the popcorn slowly popping in the crockpot waiting on that bomb.

And Judd has years of IP, alias (not just WP), etc, trails. I think he's got a lot more than we've seen too. I believe him and have been given no reason to disbelieve anything yet from him yet.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[One]

Holy shit. I know you guys have seen this before, but I haven't. The Varkala edit is the most conclusive thing I've seen about Mantanmoreland's real identity. Over a million articles, and he happens to edit the one relatively obscure town in India where Weiss went on vacation the next month.

Of course, AGFers like Morven, SV, and GWH are able to look at perhaps the best DUCK report ever assembled and see only a couple of random and-totally-non-Weiss editors--just like "10 million other" New Yorkers says GWH. I'm not optimistic this will be the silver bullet like it should be.

[Piperdown]

Holy shit. I know you guys have seen this before, but I haven't. The Varkala edit is the most conclusive thing I've seen about Mantanmoreland's real identity. Over a million articles, and he happens to edit the one relatively obscure town in India where Weiss went on vacation the next month.

Of course, AGFers like Morven, SV, and GWH are able to look at perhaps the best DUCK report ever assembled and see only a couple of random and-totally-non-Weiss editors--just like "10 million other" New Yorkers says GWH. I'm not optimistic this will be the silver bullet like it should be.

weiss's forbes piece indicates that he married into a family from that town. the edit to WP was well before any mention of varkala by weiss in any of his realworld articles. so if a WP'ian argues that it was just a fan of weiss who saw the piece, got interested in the town, so edited it on WP, that would not hold up.

i expected that the argument that weiss<>mm would be that mm is just a fan of weiss. well, the mm sock activity shows things done on wp that no fan would have known about prior to some of those things later being publicised.

the robertson-related AFD's occurred long before the edit war occurred on WP that the Weiss-Robertson lawsuit, ironically detailed in Weiss's own former employer, BusinessWeek, should be included in the Robertson & Weiss BLPs. Or in Weiss's case, his autobiographical book jacket blurb.

That's another smoker. No weiss-WP fan would have been alerted to be interested in those extremely obscure AFD's. Somone on WP already mentioned this in the Cavalcade of Matanmoreland Wikilawyering Venues that has occurred over the last week.

all this guessing will, i believe, be made moot by the emails that are supposedly going to be exposed, per Byrne's Feb 12th website material.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[The Wales Hunter]

Things are moving fast.

Who will be the first to respond to this diff?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191424429

One thing has been worrying me the more I watch this. All Jimbo has to do is say "I've met MM and he is not GW" and the whole case collapses. Would he go that far?

Anything that can be corrupted will be corrupted, I guess!

This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:

[WordBomb]

Holy shit. I know you guys have seen this before, but I haven't. The Varkala edit is the most conclusive thing I've seen about Mantanmoreland's real identity.

It's even better than that. Here are the details:

Weiss wrote this piece for Forbes.net, published October 17, 2006. Note the phrase:

In the seacoast town in Kerala where I am writing this, with its fishermen’s huts, coconut palms…

Five months earlier, on May 17, 2006, Mantanmoreland added this to the article on Varkala, India:

'''Varkala''' is a coastal Town in [[Kerala]] state, [[India]]
(IMG:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/Varkala_beach.jpg/180px-Varkala_beach.jpg)
(On that day, this image appeared in the article)

Mantanmoreland's edits to that article were the 79th and 80th in its history, and he was likely the 30th individual to touch it.

Mantanmoreland and Gary Weiss sure have a lot in common, don't they?

[Kato]

The conclusive edits for me were Mantan's occasional obscure mafia / mob history edits. Take a look yourself. So this guy Mantanmoreland, whose main interest seems to be the financial markets, makes the occasional foray into 1940s mob history on WP. This fits with Weiss's background as a financial journalist who once wrote a book on the mob.

[The Wales Hunter]

They could take the Arbcom on a field trip to Weiss's house, find him logged on as Mantanmoreland, and still they would not admit they are the same person. I predict there will be lots of blocks and bans handed out as a result of this case, but none of them on the side of the argument they should be.

I am disturbed by the thought that Sami and MM are not the same person. That is a possibility. And if they can prove that they are different people, then a lot of those who are fighting to sort this will not be able to go for the Mantan is Gary, which is far more likely.

This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:

[Piperdown]

I am disturbed by the thought that Sami and MM are not the same person. That is a possibility.

See my sig link.

If you think that Judd is a liar and has forged screen shots, then it is a possibility. I don't think Judd is a liar. I base that on previous crucibles of claims and evidence.

[The Wales Hunter]

I am disturbed by the thought that Sami and MM are not the same person. That is a possibility.

See my sig link.

If you think that Judd is a liar and has forged screen shots, then it is a possibility. I don't think Judd is a liar. I base that on previous crucibles of claims and evidence.

No, I agree. But it would be easier for them to discredit Sami = MM than MM = Weiss. So if they go for the easiest option, they'll hope the rest crumbles.

Also, MM's eagerness to have both accounts answering questions at the same time yesterday suggests the SH account, which only used open proxies, was an account used by more than one persona all along.

[Achromatic]

The biggest word for me in Jimbo's quote is "they" - as in "they are trying to spin this".

"They" is of course, code word to the cabal as "BADSITE alert". The ever so mysterious "they".

[WordBomb]

Also, MM's eagerness to have both accounts answering questions at the same time yesterday suggests the SH account, which only used open proxies, was an account used by more than one persona all along.

I don't think so. I suspect MM agreed to the challenge confident that he'd find someone or, as a fall back, SH would be uncontactable (due to all the darn stalking and harassment).

[The Wales Hunter]

Arbcom has opened:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req.../Mantanmoreland

Active arbitrators are:

1. Blnguyen
2. Charles Matthews
3. Deskana
4. FayssalF
5. FloNight
6. FT2
7. Jdforrester
8. Jpgordon
9. Kirill Lokshin (Recused)
10. Matthew Brown (Morven)
11. Newyorkbrad
12. Paul August
13. Sam Blacketer
14. Thebainer
15. UninvitedCompany

This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:

[guy]

The question is: have they both edited Twinkle Twinkle Little Star? That's the decisive test.

[The Wales Hunter]

WordBomb is SamiHarris (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)

From Thatcher:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Req...reland/Evidence

The checkusers have investigated a suspicion that the SamiHarris account was set up by Wordbomb to falsely implicate Mantanmoreland in additional (post-Lastexit) sockpuppetry. The basis for this suspicion is that Wordbomb has also occasionally used proxify.com proxies [1] [2]. Due to the nature of proxy editing, it is unlikely that this suspicion can ever be proved or disproved

[WordBomb]

The checkusers have investigated a suspicion that the SamiHarris account was set up by Wordbomb to falsely implicate Mantanmoreland in additional (post-Lastexit) sockpuppetry. The basis for this suspicion is that Wordbomb has also occasionally used proxify.com proxies [1] [2]. Due to the nature of proxy editing, it is unlikely that this suspicion can ever be proved or disproved

NO WAY.
NO WAY he actually wrote that!

Look at the first of those two diffs [1]. The editor uses the word "irregardless". It is a well known fact that I would sooner eat my own left kidney than use the word "irregardless".

And BTW...Thatcher hadn't even figured out that Samiharris was using Proxify until I told him last week (such is the degree of my intel gathering prowess). He thanked me by blocking the email-only account I used to contact him.

If Thatcher is worth two bits as a checkuser, he better be compiling a list of all proxify users to see what else comes up.

[The Wales Hunter]

Jimbo gives his evidence:

Evidence presented by Jimbo Wales

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191555850

I have personally seen no persuasive evidence

Because there has been unseemly and false speculation in some quarters that I know this (or related claims) to be true, and that I have admitted as such in private forums, it is important for me to state what I know and what I don't know.

Claims about Mantanmoreland being author Gary Weiss have been floating around for a long time. Various claims of "proof" have been made, none of which I have found convincing. At times I have believed one way, at times I have believed another way. I have investigated the claims to the best of my ability and I have been unable to find proof one way or the other.

An email I sent to Mantanmoreland and others has been widely quoted as evidence that I supposedly "know" this claim to be true. Such interpretations are malarky, and most of the people making the claims appear to me to be acting in bad faith. What I said, at a point in time, was that I believed it to be true that Mantanmoreland == Gary Weiss. This was specifically in the context of a conversation in which I was trying to get more evidence... a proof, one way or the other. Me believing at a point in time in an investigation that something was true, is not the same thing as an assertion that it is true, nor of an "admission" or anything else.

Mantanmoreland steadfastly denies being Gary Weiss. Ask him yourself if you want to know.

Related allegations that I am protecting a "friend" are nonsense. Mantanmoreland and I do not get along well at all.

Related allegations that I have some vested interest in the underlying content dispute are even worse nonsense. I have no opinion about "naked short selling". I have never sold a stock short in my life. I have no financial interests of any kind. If you read anything otherwise, or hints to that effect, on the overstock.com blog or elsewhere, well, I don't know was else to say but: nonsense.

Regarding the specific claim at issue here, whether Sami Harris and Mantanmoreland are the same user, I can say quite firmly that I do not believe it to be true. I have interacted (argued!) with both users over an extended period of time by private email, and I have not seen any reason to think it true. The offsite "evidence" relating to this comes from a highly questionable source, and furthermore strikes me as completely unpersuasive. For all we know, these are faked screenshots from someone who has engaged in a campaign of harassment and bad behavior (on-wiki and off-wiki) that has been really astounding to witness.

I have reviewed my email archives to look for similarities between the users. I have examined email headers. I have looked for textual similarities, time patterns, etc. I see nothing to lead me to a conclusion that Sami Harris and Mantanmoreland are the same user.

For these reasons, I do not believe it to be true that Mantanmoreland == Samiharris.

[Proabivouac]

Unbelievable.

These folks mimic to the point of parody the people saying Oldwindybear didn't equal Stillstudying, that Sevenofdiamonds didn't equal Nuclearumpf, etc. The evidence in this report is very strong, but apparently more is needed.

On the line is not only this one instance of abusive socking, but what remains of the integrity of the entire project.

What is being defended here isn't Wikipedia's right to follow its own policies and procedures without giving a hoot about what others think.

It's not even the right of prominent favored contributors ("the cabal") to break Wikipedia policies with impunity.

It's the right of the Jimbo and the cabal to look like asses, the right to be deceived by their own. Why anyone would want that right is beyond me. Better to remain blind, I suppose, than to admit that one once was.

This post has been edited by Proabivouac:

[Moulton]

Ultimately, what to believe or disbelieve comes down to one's religious preferences.

Some people prefer scientific/forensic evidence. Some people prefer to believe their idiosyncratic flights of fancy and dispense altogether with evidence-driven reasoning.

Some people who require scientific/forensic evidence conveniently decline to invest the time needed to examine it. The result is usually, "I have not seen evidence that convinces me." That's true, of course, since they haven't looked at the evidence that is offered for examination.

As for me, I don't know what to believe.

[guy]

Compare the treatment of Poetlister, where the evidence consists of:

* Runcorn once reverted vandalism in an article she edited extensively (hence my "Twinkle Twinkle" jibe).
* She occasionally voted in RfAs and AfDs on the same side as Runcorn or others regarded as Runcorn's socks (though never in the alleged mass vote-stackings like Ryulong's RfA where she would have been expected to, and if that were proof of anything how many well-known people would be blocked?)
* She had previously been linked with Newport by Kelly Martin, evidence that Kelly has now repudiated.

How is that more convincing than this?

[Poetlister]

This and the JoshuaZ case. Yes, I voted the same way as Runcorn on an RfA once; Runcorn pointed out that he'd been meatpuppeting for a banned user and he didn't deny it yet the RfA was overwhelming. Needless to say, the admin in question was among the most vindictive pursuers of both of us.

[The Wales Hunter]

Enjoy, everybody, perhaps we should all club together and buy a statue for a small Indian town:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191676873

To quote the image caption:

"Mantanmoreland switched to Indian time at the same time W was in India"


This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:

[Piperdown]

Enjoy, everybody, perhaps we should all club together and buy a statue for a small Indian town:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191676873

To quote the image caption:

"Mantanmoreland switched to Indian time at the same time W was in India"

Looks like a Jackson Pollack masterpiece.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mantanm...d_date-time.png

It's always been Varkala for me, babe.

I googled MM, saw that on ASM, went to WP and Forbes for myself, and it was "Gary is MM" ever since. All is dancing after that was just entertainment and laughs, because I knew then, without even later seeing Wordy's IP evidence(s) that he's put together on-Wp,off-WP over a period of more than a year, well that was just "yup....yup....uh-huh....still?....jeez....whatanidiot...." for me.

When we get to see the 1,841 emails in Byrne's stash hopefully soon and in a very reliable source way, it will be more than laughs, it will be roflmao's all around. Byrne says on his "Deep Capture" blog (2/12/08) that GW's emails admit editing WP.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[The Wales Hunter]

So the evidence that (should) piece Weiss and Mantanmoreland together was freely available all along. On Weiss' own blog and on Wiki. Wonder what Jimbo will have to say about all of this? And it was Jimbo who mentioned Weiss in his evidence, it looked like others were going to just focus on socks.

I want a full copy of that graph blown up as and framed!

This post has been edited by The Wales Hunter:

[Piperdown]

So it seems the evidence that (should) piece Weiss and Mantanmoreland together was freely available all along. On Weiss' own blog and on Wiki. Wonder what Jimbo will have to say about all of this? And it was Jimbo who mentioned Weiss in his evidence, it looked like others were going to just focus on socks.

I'd like to see the godking's editing activity that occurred to blank the GW article's AFD. I've heard that Jimmy declared MM is not GW at that time, in a definitive statement that an inquiry (lol!) had determined that. This would have been around Oct-Nov 2006 as that is when that AFD occurred according to the recovered version posted here this past week.

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[GlassBeadGame]

Enjoy, everybody, perhaps we should all club together and buy a statue for a small Indian town:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191676873

To quote the image caption:

"Mantanmoreland switched to Indian time at the same time W was in India"

I mostly glaze over with all this discussion of internal wiki-wankery. Clearly we are examining evidence presented/discarded by people who are incapable of making any reasoned evaluation of evidence and who are unable to fairly apply rules to "evidence" in any event. But having said that I have to admit the the graphic analysis of the edits showing a clear diurnal flip contemporaneous with travel half-way across the world in a nice piece of evidence. Better than the "process" is capable of making use of I'm afraid.

[No one of consequence]

"Mantanmoreland switched to Indian time at the same time W was in India"

I mostly glaze over with all this discussion of internal wiki-wankery. Clearly we are examining evidence presented/discarded by people who are incapable of making any reasoned evaluation of evidence and who are unable to fairly apply rules to "evidence" in any event. But having said that I have to admit the the graphic analysis of the edits showing a clear diurnal flip contemporaneous with travel half-way across the world in a nice piece of evidence. Better than the "process" is capable of making use of I'm afraid.

Wiki-wankery indeed. Although the "incapable of making reasoned evaluation" tars a lot of good-minded folks with an awfully broad brush. I for one have been aware of the allegations that GW=MM=SH but never took the time to undertake an exhaustive review. The Varkala Time Warp is truly a smoking gun and I suppose that people who are deeply into the controversy have known about it for some time, but as a casual reader of WR and a never-reader of any of the parties' blogs, I've never heard of it before. I am curious to see how Guy and Jimbo respond here, but don't be so "inside" yourselves that you assume that every fact you know was also known all along to all the Wikipedians involved.

[Piperdown]

The Varkala Time Warp is truly a smoking gun and I suppose that people who are deeply into the controversy have known about it for some time, but as a casual reader of WR and a never-reader of any of the parties' blogs, I've never heard of it before. I am curious to see how Guy and Jimbo respond here, but don't be so "inside" yourselves that you assume that every fact you know was also known all along to all the Wikipedians involved.

It's been known to every Arbcommer 2006-2007, and up to the toppermost of the wikimost. They all read ASM religiously, and they all tried to make sure other WP'ians didn't.

Now you know why. I found out, and verified on my own ability to click URL links lol, just by googling for few minutes. WP 'crats think we're stupid, us peasants toiling the article fields.

I doubt Jimmyhat's flipflopping show, but I do believe his statement that he and MM don't get along. I would imagine that his first interaction was a legal threat, based on what i can see happened during the oct-nov 2006 GW article AFD cover-up. I am reading between the lines, and guessing what i would have done if I were GW.

It's all so agatha christie....

This post has been edited by Piperdown:

[guy]

The Varkala Time Warp is truly a smoking gun and I suppose that people who are deeply into the controversy have known about it for some time, but as a casual reader of WR and a never-reader of any of the parties' blogs, I've never heard of it before.

That just goes to show how evidence fails to percolate to those who need to know it. Can we set up a special notification service for our most influential readers like NOOC?