Morven: corruption on the Arbitration Committee, Morven has shilled for Mantanmoreland's socking at every turn Options

[Proabivouac]

In accepting the Mantanmoreland case, Morven writes:

Accept, likewise. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 21:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC) Note: I expressed my opinion on the RFC (on largely procedural grounds), but will evaluate this case on the merits without prejudice. Arbitrators are allowed to have opinions on cases before them, and this has not historically been reason to recuse. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 22:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191263280

But Morven has not just "expressed [his] opinion on the RFC (on largely procedural grounds),"…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191027809
…a position so disconnected from reality that only three people (to date) have signed it, but has shilled for Mantanmoreland at every step, even stating that it doesn't matter if Wordbomb's allegations are true.

Now to the thread on Wikiback, where Morven rather unbelievably states:

Personally I would be very surprised if the two were the same, since I have found their tones substantially different and a substantial amount of effort has been placed into the Samiharris identity - more than I find personally credible for Mantanmoreland. I'm not saying it's utterly impossible either, of course; there simply is not enough evidence.
http://www.wikback.com/forums/ubbthreads.p...r=2816#Post2754

Far from recusing himself, Morven reactivated himself specifically to rule on this case:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191256673

" Note that arbitrators can have opinions."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191263280

(Moderator: I had meant to post this in "bureaucracy", as this is fundamentally about the conduct of the Arbitrator(s), not Mantanmoreland.)

This post has been edited by Proabivouac: Thu 14th February 2008, 7:50am

[Piperdown]

what Arb hasn't already poisoned his/her own Mantanwell on this? Some think they did so on sekret lists and so aren't going to get called out on deception?

Well hell, it looks like somebody has a pipeline into the sekret shitlists. Let's see more of this comedy show.

No wonder the Fred cleared out of arb as fast as he could.

Who's going to play Jerry Ford? Has Tricky Dick said "I'm not a crook!" yet? Is there a Sen. Sam Ervin in the arbcom house for these proceedings? And which one of the super sekret plumbers is playing G.Gordon Liddy? My guess is JzG. Gerard's more of a Haldeman type.

This post has been edited by Piperdown: Thu 14th February 2008, 12:53am

[Proabivouac]

I want to know why he's doing this. Mere bias and cluelessness isn't enough to explain it..

[Robster]

I have no evidence for this.

But there is a mystery $500,000 donation to WMF floating around...

[Piperdown]

I want to know why he's doing this. Mere bias and cluelessness isn't enough to explain it..

promises of Wikia IPO stock grants dancing in their heads....just stay faithful....stay faithful....do your time and someday you'll ring the opening bell with Jimmy on the Nasdaq!

When you see people doing weird things in the face of the truth, it is always about the Benjamins (that's american cash).

Byrne has emails coming out (when?) that he's said contain 1841 from Gary, out of 8000 total, on this entire Byrne saga - and some of them involve Wikipedia. His website last night said this, and it read like a journalist(s) was going to break the story.

I think these emails will shed a lot of light this Mantan Matter, and this arbcom is just going to embarrass the arbys any way it goes down.

This post has been edited by Piperdown: Thu 14th February 2008, 1:13am

[BobbyBombastic]

Morven got himself involved in this arbitration case simply because he can (And let's not forget FloNight). Obviously it is wrong. Individuals had asked that he recuse. Basically this is a skillful move by very good game players that are saying "fuck off".

Any party that lets him (them) get away with this is a fool. Pity, all that work down the drain. Guess the deck was stacked against you the whole time.

Making the community believe that it can actually make a difference in things like this, when it can't, is much preferred over an obviously tyrannical system, but the affect is the same. Consider that.

Mantan's going to get away with this. Just don't let him get away with it too easily.

[Proabivouac]

Morven got himself involved in this arbitration case simply because he can (And let's not forget FloNight). Obviously it is wrong. Individuals had asked that he recuse. Basically this is a skillful move by very good game players that are saying "fuck off".

"Fuck off" is an excellent summary of Morven's typical response to complaints of this nature. His general attitude has been that he just doesn't owe anybody anything, not even a fair hearing, and most certainly never an apology. Perhaps some mistake this for cool-headedness, rather than aloofness and lack of empathy.

But when I asked why he's doing this, I meant not only, why didn't he recuse himself - for which general attitude is a sufficient explanation - but why has he been running around everywhere (AN, the RfC, Krimpet's talk page, etc.) spiritedly wikilawyering to derail the investigation?

"Thats some world class wikilawyering right there."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=191082837

This post has been edited by Proabivouac: Thu 14th February 2008, 8:00am

[LamontStormstar]

I think they're also overlooking how Gary Weiss has very similar usernames. Always deceased famous people except for the account Lastexit.

[Somey]

....but why has he been running around everywhere (AN, the RfC, Krimpet's talk page, etc.) spiritedly wikilawyering to derail the investigation?

Maybe because his birthday was a week ago, and nobody even sent him a card? Or even put one of those, you know, Wikipedia "Happy Birthday" templates on his talk page?

I suppose it's even possible that he's genuinely bought into the whole Weiss schtick - which, you have to admit, is an interesting attempt to appeal to left-leaning progressive types by being both pro-capitalism and anti-capitalist at the same time. Impressionable "liberals" are presumably supposed to think, "Yeah, corporate corruption! Greedy CEO's! Scams and swindles - why, it's just plain wrong!" At which point they're then told that the "real victims" are actually Wall Street investors, as opposed to, say, the rank-and-file employees of the companies in question, or even the average consumer. And that it's perfectly OK to "fight the power" by selling options on the "bad" company's stock backed by shares you don't actually own, and that you therefore can't deliver... A sharp person would naturally say, "uh, hold on a minute ol' Gar', I think you've gotten a bit off the track on this who's-the-victim thing there," but the sort of person who would devote more than half of his/her free time to editing a web-based encyclopedia for no pay might not have that kind of critical thinking ability.

[Piperdown]

Mantan's going to get away with this. Just don't let him get away with it too easily.

with arbcom, but not with wikipedians......The Byrne Ultimatum is coming ;-)....1,841 emails....arbcom better hurry, because WP is going to community ban him anyway if they see emails from GW saying "hee, I fucked over Byrne good on WP with my sockshow!"

The key is to now ferret out all those darned socks.

User:DoRight is not a known user. What is the full username of that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&target=Doright

I have no idea whether this is a Mantansock, I saw the name mentioned by someone else as a potential MM sock used during the 'Martin Luther inspired the Nazis' assault organized by SV.

Are we sure that's Mantanmoreland? What's the evidence for this particular identification?

i have reasonable suspicion, i think others have more than that. I could be jumping the mother superior gun on that though.

When GW's socks go through times of trouble, Doright pops up. Very sporadically. Now, and the April 2007 SPA war (look at Doright's history).

Initially, I thought that Doright is a GW friend that he has made on Middle East issues, pre-WP. But I thought that about Samiharris, too, and I am one naive piper.

Lamont's right, check Doright's old edit times, esp. during the April 2007 jihad, as Fozzie & The Spreadsheet Ninjas did for the other socks, that would be interesting.

A CU for the recent Doright Van Winkle cameo would be fun but probably not revealing of anything but a proxy or a starbucks.

I think they're also overlooking how Gary Weiss has very similar usernames. Always deceased famous people except for the account Lastexit.

he's had some diverse names other than famous people that don't fit any pattern.

This post has been edited by Piperdown: Thu 14th February 2008, 1:25pm

[WhispersOfWisdom]

I think it is time to ask...who really is getting paid to perform at WP and who is paying for the right to rule? Donations go a long way toward becoming part of the ruling class; getting a paycheck makes for reliable and dependable employees.

Morven and JzG are so inextricably linked at the hip in this type of carnival, it is painfully obvious to me, that they have quite a lot "invested," or are they, in fact getting paid?

Either way, this whole thing is really creepy. WP loses big time.

[The Wales Hunter]

Oh let's cut straight to it. Those who spend the most time and are involved on Wiki the most are not usually those who conform with what society would call "normal".

How many are bipolar, or have Aspergers, or some other condition?

Many - and Wikipedia means they can throw off the shackles of their condition and lead a "normal" existence inside the Wiki game. But, of course, their condition means they can't act "normally" and we can all see it. They can't, though.

[Achromatic]

Morven got himself involved in this arbitration case simply because he can (And let's not forget FloNight). Obviously it is wrong. Individuals had asked that he recuse. Basically this is a skillful move by very good game players that are saying "fuck off".

Speaking of Flo, does anyone find this addendum to her acceptance of the case utterly inappropriate?

The case was framed and accepted by Newyorkbrad and myself to look at the status of two accounts. I see no reason that I can not do that impartially. I have no special relationship with either Bagley or Weiss, and decisions to ban one or both are based on our policies. Aspects of the Bagley-Weiss dispute has been discussed internally by the Committee for over a year. Fresh eyes of the new Committee members are welcome but I do not think that after they familiarize themselves with the situation, that the past Committee's actions will be challenged or changed. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

(emphasis mine)

[Piperdown]

Morven got himself involved in this arbitration case simply because he can (And let's not forget FloNight). Obviously it is wrong. Individuals had asked that he recuse. Basically this is a skillful move by very good game players that are saying "fuck off".

Speaking of Flo, does anyone find this addendum to her acceptance of the case utterly inappropriate?

The case was framed and accepted by Newyorkbrad and myself to look at the status of two accounts. I see no reason that I can not do that impartially. I have no special relationship with either Bagley or Weiss, and decisions to ban one or both are based on our policies. Aspects of the Bagley-Weiss dispute has been discussed internally by the Committee for over a year. Fresh eyes of the new Committee members are welcome but I do not think that after they familiarize themselves with the situation, that the past Committee's actions will be challenged or changed. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

(emphasis mine)

FloNight, cardcarrying TeamSlim member, there's a better venue that's going to challenge your bullshit. I wonder if he/she is on Gary's emails that we're all waiting for....

[BobbyBombastic]

But when I asked why he's doing this, I meant not only, why didn't he recuse himself - for which general attitude is a sufficient explanation - but why has he been running around everywhere (AN, the RfC, Krimpet's talk page, etc.) spiritedly wikilawyering to derail the investigation?

That is a very good question. Maybe the contents of the cyberstalking list would shed some light on this. I cannot come up with a solid explanation for it.

Just thinking out loud here-- perhaps it has something to do with his personal feelings about Judd Bagley, which include both Wikipedia stuff and perhaps dislike for the man himself. In other words, a grudge or more likely just an inherent disdain. Morven doesn't care about the whole Mantan/sami/weiss thingy because he dislikes Bagley. Maybe he's not even that crazy about Gary Weiss--but he really doesn't like Bagley.

I want to use the phrase "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" but it doesn't fit here. However, I think it's something like that. I just can't come up with an analogy or phrase for it.

[GlassBeadGame]

I want to use the phrase "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" but it doesn't fit here. However, I think it's something like that. I just can't come up with an analogy for it.

In a sock rich environment "the friend of my enemy is my enemy" means something different entirely.

[Piperdown]

Morven (and WP) have drawn a battle line in the sand about WB and i'd like to address one point of it....one that I don't think "Wordbomb" has made for himself, probably because IT IS IRRELEVANT to whether Gary Weiss has serially abused Wikipedia.

I googled the hell out of Gary Weiss and Judd Bagley. This was after I first fell down this rabbit hole in March 2007 by googling "Mantanmoreland", and found several websites on all sides of this issue.

When I researched Judd's background, I found that he was hired by Overstock around Sept 1 2006. Immediately Prior to that, and WHILE HE WAS "WORDBOMB", he was the CEO of a website that was not affiliated with Overstock in any way. Other than he interviewed its CEO for a "Podcast".

Contrast that with other editors of NSS articles that work for, at least in one case, a publication targeted at hedge funds and regularly interviewed the "other side" of this Byrne affair in a debatably rosy light, to be kind.
Or other editors that used those WP articles to linkspam their hot new book and fringe view all over them. That fringe view got relegated to the crackpot section of the article when SEC Chairman Cox put Gary Weiss back into the "What the Fuck, did he really say illegal trading should be used to offset illegal trading?" bin. I couldn't believe that I was leaving that material in the article, but I thought it was best to present all sides of the issue, even fringe conspiracy theories about how to enforce stock markets.

Judd's editing history (IP) shows, by his own admission, that he added in his own businessjive site as a link to WP, in early 2006. It got removed, and it is not a reliable source anyway. Whoever did that was right, in the context of WP. I don't think Judd knew much about the WP Rules when he did that, and probably didn't care either way.

I don't see any evidence at all that, after hired by Overstock, he edited WP in any way, other than to edit talk pages to defend himself.

If Overstock gave a shit, they could sue WP back to Bomisville for what has appeared about them that I think are lies (spamming, etc) based on my research. Hu12 and Gerard have a lot to answer for but won't, lol.

But this is all neither here nor there about whether Mantanmoreland and His Calvacade should be banned or not.

Fred should have banned them in 2006 but is now trying to wikilawyer and half-truth around that now on Arb.

As a private citizen prior to working for O'stock, Judd Bagley was portrayed as a vicious liar on WP in 2006, and he has been trying to clear his name.

That he was hired by Overstock after the Wordbomb affair is something that only Wickedpedians like Morven could think they could "spin" their way into winning a argument with misdirections and half-truths. It usually works.

Before more WP'ians beat the "Evil Corporate Shill" drum more, someone needs to start pointing out some of these facts and timelines to counter, or {{fact}} prove some of the bullshit.

I am constantly shocked, shocked I tell you!, about what I can find in 2 minutes of googling, that takes otherwise intellifent bureaucrats with hidden agendas months and years to.... be forced to realise.

Usually many months after you point them to proof, wait for them to either not respond or lie, until they are publicly proven wrong. It' a lot like realworld politics, lol.

This post has been edited by Piperdown: Thu 14th February 2008, 8:28pm

[Jonny Cache]

Howsabout this —

Time wounds all heels —
Except for tube socks —
Which don't have any —

Darn!

Jonny

[thekohser]

Wasn't sure where to post this, but JzG is consistent, if anything.

Greg

[Achromatic]

Wasn't sure where to post this, but JzG is consistent, if anything.

Greg

That he definitely is. From higher up in that article:

According to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Samiharris, the only absolutely identified sock was Palabrazo, being WordBomb yet again (he must be loving all this attention and the way he's been able to exploit people like Cla68 and Dan Tobias).

Reads to me like a personal attack, insulting the intelligence of other editors, surely?