Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

I asked this before in the recent discussion about poor A Nobody, but it seemed to get lost in the shuffle. So let's try again.

Shadowjams abruptly turned up in January 2009 and the person's http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Shadowjams&oldid=265628586was to self-identify as a recent changes patroller. The first day edits includedhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:71.48.241.43&diff=prev&oldid=265629491 vandals and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shadowjams&diff=prev&oldid=265660836 that how-to guide given to newbies.

Clearly, this was not a newbie. Yet unless I am mistaken, this person has not publicly identified as being a previous account. Considering that this person has escaped the notice of the pathetic few who abuse their checkuser privileges for fishing purposes, it appears this sock is special.

So, are there any clues regarding who Shadowjams is/was?

Posted by: EricBarbour

I don't have any special knowledge of SJ's identity, but his article creations are mostly obscure random subjects,
for which he makes a miserable stub--exactly what a sock of an experienced user often does, to inflate
the new account's edit statistics. Plus hours and hours of Huggling every day. He's used virtually all of the
available scripts for vandalism reversion.

If I had to take a wild guess, he might be an attorney from Chicago, just based on his
top-edited history. But I won't stand behind it--he's a very sneaky dude.

More interesting is one of his creations: the "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shadowjams/Subtle_Vandalism_Taskforce". What a joke.
They don't even have a coherent process or description of "subtle vandalism".
Typical vague, useless WP "policy writing".

I suspect he was known in the past as a famous troublemaker, and was banned. This is his attempt to
play up a fresh good record, with RFA as the goal. Consummate RPG-player.

Betcha that Silver seren (T-C-L-K-R-D) knows who he is......

(Whoever he is, this is a massive waste of human potential. But then, one could say the same thing
about a long list of admins. Isn't that right, Horse?....... )

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Massive? Now now...they're just big-boned.




It is obviously a sock account -- albeit a protected one (this kind of crap wouldn't go on so long without someone getting suspicious, especially when you consider how the account began).

However, I don't see RfA as a goal -- after a year-and-a-half of game playing, that person would have been there and done that by now.

Posted by: EricBarbour

Well, not having that kind of special craziness that WP admins need , I could not say. But typically, anyone going to THAT DAMN MUCH EFFORT usually wants to get the admin bit. He's up to 47,000 edits already, most racked up since last October. I saw him mark hundreds upon hundreds of IP-address users for patrol--that's not a trivial game, that's obsessive-nutso. Just like any of the most manic vandal-patrollers we've seen before. (Choose a dire name from a hat. Come to think of it, this is kinda like our old pal Ryulong....minus the obsession with stupid Japanese kiddy shows.....)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deagle_AP/Fire_Team_Alpha my ass. What a joke.
These are the trappings of an online RPG, not an "encyclopedia".

Posted by: NuclearWarfare

Why does it bother you so much that some people see it that way? I could think of plenty of other things to get annoyed about.

Posted by: Milton Roe

Well, there's just something about seeing masked people sneaking around with RPG's that sets your teeth on edge.

Posted by: NuclearWarfare

I advise you to http://www.flatheadbeacon.com/articles/article/sheet_thief_and_a_suspicious_chopper/17876/.

Posted by: Milton Roe

I am hurt at not being mentioned among the cases of wasted human potential, also.

At least I'm not billing clients while doing "it."

Posted by: EricBarbour

Okay, snappy guys: who do you think Shadowjams really is?........

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

You'll notice that our resident admins/arbitrators/checkusers aren't touching this one. Even young master NuclearWarfare tried to change the subject rather than answer the question about this obvious bit of sockpuppetry.

Hmmm....

Posted by: NuclearWarfare

Hell, I don't know. Not going to try to answer either. He doesn't seem to be disruptive, so even if he is a banned user, I don't really care unless he runs for Adminship.

Posted by: Zoloft

Realizing the importance of the case, my men are rounding up twice the usual number of suspects.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Okay, NW, so let's get it straight -- it is okay for a "banned" user to participate on WP as long as (1) he is not disruptive and (2) he doesn't run for adminship? This seems like a considerable deviation from established policy.

Can our fellow admins and arbitrators confirm this statement -- it is okay for non-disruptive "banned" users to participate on WP?

Posted by: Eva Destruction

I'm neither a Wikipedia admin nor an arbitrator, but I'd say of course it is, and that goes for every website on the planet. If someone's being non-disruptive – that is, not doing anything to draw attention to themselves – how would anyone even know the banned user had returned? You of all people should know that one.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Well, you know that. And I know that. But tell that to the "banned is banned" crowd that goes "fishing" around the Wiki-waters.

But, of course, that doesn't unlock the mystery of Shadowjams -- and that person has more than called attention to himself in the past year-and-a-half (take a look through his Talk Page archives -- it is kind of hard not to notice this character). Yet no one seems to notice, let alone care.

Posted by: Eva Destruction

Um. I believe you're already aware of my opinions on both what "banned" means, and who Shadowjams is.

Speaking of obvious socks, who the hell is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=East+of+Borschov? Who creates a sock account to disambiguate the different meanings of "Lutyens"?

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Yes to the first point. On the second, I don't have your permission to openly share your opinion, do I?



We should start a new forum called The Sock Drawer! Mods, whaddaya think?

Posted by: NuclearWarfare

As long as Wikipedia has no meaningful way to stop these people from editing, then try to stop banned users from editing is pretty inefficient. Therefore, admins should concentrate on stopping only editors who remain disruptive after they begin editing again.

Sure, what I said is a deviation from current policy. It's just my opinion.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

It is a nice opinion, to be certain, but it is not one that is shared by the checkuser fishing fleet.

As for Shadowjams, I believe that the person who owns that account is a member of the WR family. If I am correct, would that person care to raise their hand?

Posted by: Killiondude

I think there are a few admins and even checkusers who would agree with your opinion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FinalRapture, for instance, is another user who admins and checkusers have turned a blind eye to, most likely because they are "constructively editing."

Posted by: Milton Roe

Meeeeeeeee!! I spend all my time reverting vandals who only exist because of the paralysis in WP's sprotection and flagging policies.

Posted by: EricBarbour

Something tells me you're mowing the wrong field.......go ahead and drop a hint.

Posted by: Ceoil

I sence a fishing rod and wriggling bait. Nice try though!

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

His sig is another riddle. He comes not to promote Jesus (✝) but to bring a dagger (†). How these relate to the Islamic symbol (☪) is left as an exercise.

Besides if one is truly making a clean start they can use their wacky sigs to profess any faith(s) they want—some dissembly required—except of course for Jainism. Then watch the user's brain-dead peers present him or her up as a shining example of being able to edit unbiasedly despite their alleged religion (see [i]handicap principle[i]) about which they are happy to know little and care even less. Take this to any extreme you want and it's still a win-win situation (ignoring PR).

So many religions, so little time eh? -- chARlotTeWeBbBbBbBlolwhatever ✡ ⚽ ⚑ ☯ ☭ ☬ ☮ ॐ ☸ (talk · contribs · rfar_5) 10:01, 5 June 2010 (UTC)









yeah, it's the fucking annex so i don't want to hear it

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Oh, that's rich. And no one reported this guy for sockpuppetry?