The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This forum is for discussing specific Wikipedia editors, editing patterns, and general efforts by those editors to influence or direct content in ways that might not be in keeping with Wikipedia policy. Please source your claims and provide links where appropriate. For a glossary of terms frequently used when discussing Wikipedia and related projects, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary.

> The idiocy and the irony, banning nonsense goes full circle
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 1:29am
Post #1


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



A few months ago, I was arguing here with Slim about how, back in the old days, she and others were targeting just about anyone as being a LaRouchie, and I described the chaos that witchhunt had caused. I especially noted an incident when herself and long time user (and another anti-LaRouche figure) 172 (T-C-L-K-R-D) discussed banning a totally innocent guy as a "New LaRouche editor" back in 2007.

Here is my post, Slim simply batted this incident off by not addressing it specifically - claiming that people weren't banned as LaRouchies without good reason.

QUOTE(Kato @ Sun 12th April 2009, 6:07am) *

Not necessarily so. The whole LaRouche vs anti-LaRouche thing was a farce that had spilled out all over Wikipedia. Wholly unrelated people were getting threatened by Wikipedia powerplayers as "LaRouchies" on a regular basis. People saw it with their own eyes and have not been swayed by Hersch at this site. It was outrageous, and one of my first posts at this site was to highlight one such offense.

In April, 2007, an editor went to SlimVirgin and Willbeback and wrote this about Mbhiii (T-C-L-K-R-D) :

QUOTE(User:172)
New LaRouche editor

This looks quite familar now. [10] Like the last HK sockpuppet blocked by SlimVirgin, HonourableSchoolboy, this account has been editing articles that appear in my recent contributions history or are linked to my userpage. Sigh. 172 | Talk 19:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Sadly, by now I can spot LaRouche propaganda from a mile away. 172 | Talk 20:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


The message to SlimVirgin has since been deleted. But the spirit of the message is typical. The accused had nothing to do with LaRouche, and his edits had nothing to do with LaRouche. Yet he was immediately attacked as a "New LaRouche" editor.

A group of editors, led by SlimVirgin, and accompanied by anti-LaRouche campaigners Chip Berlet and Dennis King (whose Conflicts Of Interest were never questioned) were allowed to treat Wikipedia like an anti-LaRouche version of the McCarthy witch-hunts. Thus creating massive bad feelings and subverting the whole culture of the place.


Well here comes the most ridiculous development yet. Having spent years orchestrating witch-hunts with Slim and Will against LaRouchies, former admin User:172 has himself been indefinitely banned by some lunatic administrator - on the declaration that he is the pro-LaRouche renegade Cognition (T-C-L-K-R-D) based on "checkuser evidence".

So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch! laugh.gif

And to cap it off. Slim was right in the mix during these latest banning discussions which nailed 172!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
gomi
post Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am
Post #2


Member
********

Group: Members
Posts: 3,022
Joined: Fri 17th Nov 2006, 6:38pm
Member No.: 565



QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 6:29pm) *
So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch!

Almost certainly the latter. I was told confidentially that checkuser is (as it has always been) almost useless for any but the simplest forms of sockpuppetry. Many of these POV sock declarations derive from offline conversations among checkusers and other editors who keep files of old IP addresses for their nemeses, to use for later comparison. Never mind the half-life of a particular IP address, if the editor with the suspect POV edits from the same city, the same ISP, the same geographic area, or uses the same browser, computer, or operating system, from several years earlier then they feel that is enough for a "sock confirmed by checkuser" finding, effectively insulating it from question.

In a way, this is the most negative legacy of Poetlister. Wikipidiots were so aghast at having been led round the rosemary bush by PoetGuy, they have a hair-trigger now, and the gun cabinet isn't locked.

Of course, this isn't entirely new, either. Before he was defrocked, Jayjg (T-C-L-K-R-D) was fond of banning editors who hadn't edited in over a year, claiming "sock confirmed by checkuser". He just didn't care what people thought, and I'll bet they don't care much more now. They ban whomever they please, all the rest is window-dressing.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
No one of consequence
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:00am
Post #3


I want to stare at the seaside and do nothing at all
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri 23rd Feb 2007, 2:34am
Member No.: 1,010

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 6:29pm) *
So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch!

Almost certainly the latter. I was told confidentially that checkuser is (as it has always been) almost useless for any but the simplest forms of sockpuppetry.

Yes and no. But that is what appears to have happened here. A number of accounts share a single IP, and their edits overlap in such a way that reassignment from one editor or group to another editor or group is not possible. It appears to be a residential IP. In some quantum alternate universe, perhaps, by an amazing coincidence, Cognition moved in next door to 172 and has been poaching his wi-fi.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kato
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am
Post #4


dhd
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,521
Joined: Fri 29th Dec 2006, 8:39pm
Member No.: 767



QUOTE(No one of consequence @ Sat 5th September 2009, 5:00am) *

QUOTE(gomi @ Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am) *

QUOTE(Kato @ Fri 4th September 2009, 6:29pm) *
So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge account ever (going back to 2002), or WP's checkuser facitilities are so incompetent, it has convicted the Witchfinder General of being a witch!

Almost certainly the latter. I was told confidentially that checkuser is (as it has always been) almost useless for any but the simplest forms of sockpuppetry.

Yes and no. But that is what appears to have happened here. A number of accounts share a single IP, and their edits overlap in such a way that reassignment from one editor or group to another editor or group is not possible. It appears to be a residential IP. In some quantum alternate universe, perhaps, by an amazing coincidence, Cognition moved in next door to 172 and has been poaching his wi-fi.

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.

Cognition was a LaRouchie who believed the World Wildlife Fund were behind a genocidal scheme to oppress the third world.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Sat 5th September 2009, 4:44am
Post #5


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am) *

Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian who wrote several highly accomplished featured articles in the early days of WP. He was an administrator, and held a high standard of what he considered scholarship.

Cognition was a LaRouchie who believed the World Wildlife Fund were behind a genocidal scheme to oppress the third world.

172 was desysoped for his aggressive edit warring and POV pushing...twice! Is it really so inconceivable that he would create a ridiculous sock to be his nemesis and engender sympathy?

The only other credible explaination is that Cognition cracked his password after three years (and after 172 made only two edits over a 14 month period or so).

This post has been edited by One: Sat 5th September 2009, 4:50am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
Kato   The idiocy and the irony   Sat 5th September 2009, 1:29am
Malleus   Who is this LaRouche character, and why should I c...   Sat 5th September 2009, 1:42am
Kato   Who is this LaRouche character, and why should I ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 1:47am
A Horse With No Name   Who is this LaRouche character, and why should I ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 3:07am
gomi   So either User:172 was the most brilliant stooge a...   Sat 5th September 2009, 1:48am
Kato   [quote name='gomi' post='192782' date='Sat 5th Se...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:20am
No one of consequence   Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian w...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:29am
One   Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian w...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:44am
Kato   [quote name='Kato' post='192794' date='Sat 5th Se...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:54am
One   The only other credible explaination is that Co...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:00am
Kato   [quote name='Kato' post='192802' date='Sat 5th Se...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:11am
Somey   I guess, on reflection and reviewing Cognitions...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:09am
Herschelkrustofsky   Get serious please. 172 was a liberal historian w...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:47am
One   Well here comes the most ridiculous development y...   Sat 5th September 2009, 3:04am
Kato   [quote name='Kato' post='192778' date='Sat 5th Se...   Sat 5th September 2009, 3:53am
One   I remember 172 vaguely, and surveying his work ref...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:13am
Somey   Possibilities suggested so far: 1) Cognition creat...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:27am
Lar   Don't forget the one where 172 and Cognition ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 12:40pm
Kato   [quote name='Somey' post='192808' date='Sat 5th S...   Sat 5th September 2009, 1:27pm
Herschelkrustofsky   No. The most likely explanation (amazing as it so...   Sat 5th September 2009, 2:53pm
Somey   First of all, the WP database definitely is f**cke...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:50pm
Kato   User:172 is clearly British, however No, 172 i...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:18pm
Somey   User:172 is clearly British, however No, 172 is (w...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:19pm
Kato   [quote name='Kato' post='192844' date='Sat 5th Se...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:23pm
dtobias   I will ignore. Convincing Wikipedia criticism is ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:29pm
Somey   I would disagree strongly there. No criticism tha...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:34pm
Kato   This is interesting because Cognition [url=http:/...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:43pm
LessHorrid vanU   ... Well I'll criticise in my way, you in y...   Sat 5th September 2009, 8:29pm
One   You know, maybe it is an outrageous coincidence. ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 8:58pm
everyking   Everyking: do you think potentially-compromised a...   Sat 5th September 2009, 9:57pm
No one of consequence   First of all, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/inde...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:19am
tarantino   [quote name='Somey' post='192839' date='Sat 5th S...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:56am
MBisanz   [quote name='Somey' post='192839' date='Sat 5th ...   Sun 6th September 2009, 2:39am
everyking   He was. He didn't reply. This case is far t...   Sun 6th September 2009, 2:02am
One   [quote name='No one of consequence' post='192885'...   Sun 6th September 2009, 4:41am
gomi   Everyking, did you know that this 172/Cognition e...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:39am
Herschelkrustofsky   [quote name='One' post='192896' date='Sat 5th Sep...   Sun 6th September 2009, 7:11am
TungstenCarbide   [quote name='gomi' post='192899' date='Sat 5th Se...   Sun 6th September 2009, 9:24am
Kato   This case is far too simple for all this drama. ...   Sun 6th September 2009, 7:37am
No one of consequence   What you should have done is either email 172 and...   Sun 6th September 2009, 11:31am
Peter Damian   I agree it would have been less dramatic to block...   Sun 6th September 2009, 11:33am
No one of consequence   I agree it would have been less dramatic to bloc...   Sun 6th September 2009, 12:01pm
Kato   Ok, so there are three options: [b]Bad hand / Blac...   Sun 6th September 2009, 12:15pm
No one of consequence   Ok, so there are three options: [*][b]Bad hand / ...   Sun 6th September 2009, 12:35pm
One   [*][b]Geographical coincidence. As both 172 and C...   Sun 6th September 2009, 2:24pm
Kato   [list] [*][b]Geographical coincidence. As both 17...   Sun 6th September 2009, 2:40pm
One   [quote name='Kato' post='192927' date='Sun 6th S...   Sun 6th September 2009, 2:53pm
Kato   [quote name='One' post='192935' date='Sun 6th Se...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:10pm
Kelly Martin   Some dude selling badges edited WP on my current h...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:12pm
Kato   Some dude selling badges edited WP on my current ...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:20pm
Ceoil   Who knows. To be fair to elaborate sock puppeteers...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:54pm
MBisanz   [quote name='Kato' post='192938' date='Sun 6th Se...   Sun 6th September 2009, 4:32pm
No one of consequence   What does this mean though, "residential...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:47pm
Kato   What you should have done is either email 172 an...   Sun 6th September 2009, 11:47am
Kelly Martin   We did email him, he did not reply. It's Labor...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:03pm
One   You've managed to convince me that you're...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:06pm
GlassBeadGame   The puppet-provocateur theory makes sense to me. ...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:18pm
Kato   The puppet-provocateur theory makes sense to me. ...   Sun 6th September 2009, 3:37pm
taiwopanfob   Here the simpler technical explanation points to a...   Sat 5th September 2009, 2:30pm
Kato   I remember 172 vaguely, and surveying his work re...   Sat 5th September 2009, 11:30am
Kato   Slim reckons the black ops / stalking horse theory...   Sat 5th September 2009, 3:45pm
One   It still looks more credible than Slim's beli...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:08pm
Hell Freezes Over   Cognition's behaviour looks typical LaRouche ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:11pm
GlassBeadGame   Cognition's behaviour looks typical LaRouche...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:04pm
Kato   "Chip Berlet is a 5 cent thug in a long-rang...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:35pm
Random832   "Chip Berlet is a 5 cent thug in a long-range...   Sun 6th September 2009, 7:53am
Herschelkrustofsky   Cognition's behaviour looks typical LaRouche ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 8:47pm
It's the blimp, Frank   Is it possible that there is a huge technical glit...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:01pm
MBisanz   I don't know anything about the current player...   Sat 5th September 2009, 4:30pm
Newyorkbrad   (background snipped) Well here comes the most rid...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:18pm
Somey   So it just seems to me that it might have been bet...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:24pm
Kelly Martin   So it just seems to me that it might have been bet...   Sat 5th September 2009, 10:31pm
everyking   If Cognition is the creepy-crazy LaRouchian who w...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:00am
Kelly Martin   So you're saying you actually saw a LaRouchite...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:33am
MBisanz   So you're saying you actually saw a LaRouchit...   Sun 6th September 2009, 6:21am
Cla68   [quote name='Kelly Martin' post='192897' date='Su...   Sun 6th September 2009, 7:00am
Herschelkrustofsky   So you're saying you actually saw a LaRouchit...   Sun 6th September 2009, 6:58am
TungstenCarbide   If Cognition is the creepy-crazy LaRouchian who we...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:41am
Somey   For more background, there's this thread, whic...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:44pm
Kato   The plot thickens. Someone has corrected me on th...   Sat 5th September 2009, 5:50pm
Somey   This is interesting because Cognition [url=http://...   Sat 5th September 2009, 6:19pm
The Joy   Is there anyway for the CheckUsers to look at data...   Sat 5th September 2009, 7:17pm
Grep   There's another way in which CU results can gi...   Sat 5th September 2009, 7:51pm
Somey   There's another way in which CU results can gi...   Sat 5th September 2009, 8:13pm
Kato   If anything, it's surprising Hersfold didn...   Sun 6th September 2009, 12:24am
everyking   From my perspective, the most ludicrous aspect of ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 8:01pm
GlassBeadGame   From my perspective, the most ludicrous aspect of...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:36am
One   You and SlimVirgin seem to disagree about what is ...   Sat 5th September 2009, 10:01pm
Krimpet   Assuming some folks at a meetup brought their lapt...   Sun 6th September 2009, 6:23am
MBisanz   Assuming some folks at a meetup brought their lap...   Sun 6th September 2009, 6:49am
Kato   172 said he was employed at a college in St Peters...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:12pm
No one of consequence   172 said he was employed at a college in St Peter...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:32pm
Kato   One appears to be residential (belongs to a commo...   Sun 6th September 2009, 1:51pm
Moulton   Why would an IP necessarily be marked as residenti...   Sun 6th September 2009, 2:42pm
No one of consequence   Why would an IP necessarily be marked as resident...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:38pm
Kelly Martin   Personally I'm leaning toward the "hijack...   Sun 6th September 2009, 4:03pm
One   Two identical IPs on two services and no other IPs...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:25pm
Kelly Martin   Incidentally, I don't recall anyone here defen...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:43pm
One   It's not that I think you're wrong; I jus...   Sun 6th September 2009, 5:49pm
3 Pages V  1 2 3 >


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd 5 13, 3:38am