User:Chase me ladies, I'm the cavalry, Another member of the military moonlights as an admin and makes a fool Options

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

Oh yes and he is not working 'for free'. Presumably is work on Wikipedia is being funded at the taxpayer's expense, i.e. at my expense. Outrageous. Get a job (and a life).

Excuse me ... but isn't that against the requirements for receipt of social benefit in the UK?

"I am working full-time" ... 8 hours a day. He is playing 8 hours a day instead of looking for a job.

[thekohser]

Wait.

Before anyone starts saying this guy is milking taxpayers of their money while he wiki-fiddles, do we know that he's actually receiving public funds in lieu of a wage?

[Peter Damian]

It’s rather sad. His Linked In page has his current job as “English Wikipedia Arbitrator at Wikipedia”. The ‘company website’ links to his user page on Wikipedia.

He is a reservist in the Royal Naval Reserve. This is a voluntary organisation that supports the Royal Navy. Volunteers are only paid (about £40 a day) when they go on training.

[A Horse With No Name]

It’s rather sad. His Linked In page has his current job as “English Wikipedia Arbitrator at Wikipedia”. The ‘company website’ links to his user page on Wikipedia.

He is a reservist in the Royal Naval Reserve. This is a voluntary organisation that supports the Royal Navy. Volunteers are only paid (about £40 a day) when they go on training.

I accessed his CV on LinkedIn. He graduated from university in 2006 and had a single private sector job, from 2009 and 2010. He has been a seaman reservist in the Royal Navy since 2007. Otherwise, no employment (volunteering on a website doesn't count.)

I don’t know if this is a reflection on him or the state of job opportunities in the UK, but it is not what I expected – especially when his WP User Page in 2008 stated, “I am an officer in the Royal Navy.”

[Heat]

It’s rather sad. His Linked In page has his current job as “English Wikipedia Arbitrator at Wikipedia”. The ‘company website’ links to his user page on Wikipedia.

He is a reservist in the Royal Naval Reserve. This is a voluntary organisation that supports the Royal Navy. Volunteers are only paid (about £40 a day) when they go on training.

I accessed his CV on LinkedIn. He graduated from university in 2006 and had a single private sector job, from 2009 and 2010. He has been a seaman reservist in the Royal Navy since 2007. Otherwise, no employment (volunteering on a website doesn't count.)

I don’t know if this is a reflection on him or the state of job opportunities in the UK, but it is not what I expected – especially when his WP User Page in 2008 stated, “I am an officer in the Royal Navy.”

Well, given that Prince William and Prince Harry are also British military officers I don't think real world employability is a criteria for being an officer.

[A Horse With No Name]

It appears that Lord Nelson is reading WR, because he abruptly reconfigured his User Page history when it was pointed out here that he falsely claimed to be "an officer in the Royal Navy": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

But as any Wikipedian knows all too well, you cannot rewrite history: http://www.webcitation.org/5voZByePw

[carbuncle]

It appears that Lord Nelson is reading WR, because he abruptly reconfigured his User Page history when it was pointed out here that he falsely claimed to be "an officer in the Royal Navy": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

But as any Wikipedian knows all too well, you cannot rewrite history: http://www.webcitation.org/5voZByePw

If someone says "I am an officer in the "Royal Navy" and displays the insignia of lieutenant on their user page, I think most people would assume that they are a lieutenant in the Royal Navy. Surely a trusted admin and Arbcom member would not first lie about such a thing, and then compound the issue by deleting revisions of their user page? I'm sure there will be clarification forthcoming in the very near future which will clear up all of this unfortunate misunderstanding.

[carbuncle]

It’s rather sad. His Linked In page has his current job as “English Wikipedia Arbitrator at Wikipedia”. The ‘company website’ links to his user page on Wikipedia.

He is a reservist in the Royal Naval Reserve. This is a voluntary organisation that supports the Royal Navy. Volunteers are only paid (about £40 a day) when they go on training.

What LinkedIn page? There is no LinkedIn profile page and I'm sure there never was. Although when I was researching semen reservists on Google, I accidentally came across this cached page of a LinkedIn profile of someone with the same name.

Richard Symonds’s Experience

Social Media & Fundraising Volunteer
Wikimedia Foundation

(Non-Profit; 11-50 employees; Internet industry)

Currently holds this position
Seaman Reservist
Royal Navy

(Government Agency; Military industry)

2007 — Present (3 years )

• Above Water Force Protection branch, providing close-in protection to MoD assets worldwide.
• Position requires excellent teamwork skills, stress management and the ability to make rapid high-pressure decisions. First aid and firefighting training are renewed on a yearly basis.
• I scored the second highest category in my most recent report, and my teamwork and leadership skills are excellent.

This post has been edited by carbuncle: Tue 18th January 2011, 3:33pm

[lilburne]

Although when I was researching semen reservists on Google

Surly not.

[A Horse With No Name]

What LinkedIn page? There is no LinkedIn profile page and I'm sure there never was.

He deleted the page -- he is clearly aware of this conversation, otherwise there would be no reason for the page to abruptly vanish one day after Petey and I cited its content. Especially when those contents show a job history that contradicts claims of his being a naval officer.

As of now, however, the residue of the deleted page remains in full -- but it is only accessible if you first sign into your LinkedIn account and then click the Google cache link above.

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name: Tue 18th January 2011, 4:06pm

[Kelly Martin]

It's interesting to me how many Wikipedians are clearly so ashamed of their association with Wikipedia that they go to great lengths to conceal it. Why is participation in Wikipedia such a shameful thing?

[carbuncle]

There was some discussion earlier about whether this image was intended to prove that Chase Me/HawkerTyphoon was in the Royal Navy. On the one hand it says "HawkerTyphoon is in the Navy" right on the image's page. On the other hand, there's the uniform question.

The shoulder patch is clearly not Royal Navy. The central insignia appears to be a maple leaf, there's some writing at the bottom that could start with "C" and there's some tiny red thing at the upper left. I will award 10 ten wiki-points for correctly guessing which country this badge originates from and a further 50 wiki-points for correctly identifying the service. The first one should be easy, but I'll give a further hint: it's not Cameroon.

Suffice to say, this image has nothing to do with the Royal Navy, or at least provides nothing to substantiate any claims of being part of it.

[thekohser]

I was asked to convey the following e-mail note to me from Richard ("Chase me ladies..."):

Greg,

Re: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showt...525&hl=chase+me - I want to clear a few things up, but don't want to sign up to WR, so I'm emailing you.

I'm not on the dole, and I want to make that very clear - that would be immoral of me, and as you can see by the shitty state of the place I live, I don't exactly live in the lap of luxury. I scrape by with the help of my other half and our savings, as well as my job in the reserves. I take no taxpayer money of any kind, bar my wages from the navy reserves, which I am entitled to and work for. I am also not a submariner, and I find it mildly amusing that some of the WR folks think so based on a single picture taken of me, at a closed dockyard, in front of an ancient submarine, from before I joined the navy. I am in the reserves; we don't have submarines - and I'm not a high-flier in the reserves either, just a dogsbody. I do it for the same reason I do WP - because I enjoy it! The shirt in the now infamous picture of me is a Canadian customs one I picked up from Brick Lane, in London, and the photo of me aiming a GPMG was taken at 'Navy Days' - in both pictures I'm acting as a civilian. I don't like putting pictures of me in a uniform online because my job in the reserves obviously leaves me open to real-life attacks, not to mention stern words from my CO about 'security' and so on and so forth. I haven't been to the reserves in a month or two, anyway - my own projects (the fundraiser, contrib team, the organising of the London WP:10 parties, to name a few), have taken up most of my time.

As to the 'outing', that was not done by Daniel Brandt (who has most of the information about me wrong, and I'm not entirely sure where he got that date for my birthday...) - it refers to a piece that appeared about me in the press a few years ago which linked my pseudonym to my real name and other details about me and my then-employer. It's since been removed by the website as a show of good faith. As to the 'Arbcom controls content' and 'top Wikipedia contributor' nonsense that the BBC decided to put up, I had no part in that. You know how the press works. They think that arbcom is some sort of mystical top-echelon cabal that controls everything, and that you have to be 'promoted' to get there. We all know that's not true and that I'm a piss-poor content contributor, and I've made it clear publicly in the past that Arbcom doesn't control content. I explained what arbcom do to the gentleman who interviewed me, and he's obviously tried to condense it down as much as he can into something that the public can understand.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Kind regards,

Richard

P.S. If anyone wants to contact me for any reason, I'm on chasemewiki@gmail.com.

[Heat]

It appears that Lord Nelson is reading WR, because he abruptly reconfigured his User Page history when it was pointed out here that he falsely claimed to be "an officer in the Royal Navy": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

But as any Wikipedian knows all too well, you cannot rewrite history: http://www.webcitation.org/5voZByePw

Interesting. Lying on your resume is enough to get you fired from any "top end" job (and any low end job for that matter). I can think of a few corporate execs who were forced to resign when resume fudging came to light, even when it came to light years after the fact and the offence occurred long before the individual rose through the ranks. It will be interesting to see if a "top end" position at Wikipedia is subject to the same standards or will his fibbing be excused by Jimbo the way it originally was for Essjay?

[Heat]

I was asked to convey the following e-mail note to me from Richard ("Chase me ladies..."):

Let me know if you have any questions.

Yeah, why did you lie about being an officer and, now that this lie has been exposed, when are you going to submit your resignation from ArbCom?

[A Horse With No Name]

I was asked to convey the following e-mail note to me from Richard ("Chase me ladies..."):

Let me know if you have any questions.

Yeah, why did you lie about being an officer and, now that this lie has been exposed, when are you going to submit your resignation from ArbCom?

And in follow up:

1. Why did you delete your LinkedIn profile one day after WR cited your shaky claims of being an officer?

2. Why did you delete the history of your WP user page one day after WR cited your shaky claims of being an officer?

3. If you were concerned about media coverage that linked your pseudonym to your real name, why have you continued to use that pseudonym as your identity on several social media sites?

4. What are you getting Wills and Kate for a wedding present? (Hey, all WP-talk gets dull after a while.)

This post has been edited by A Horse With No Name: Tue 18th January 2011, 7:04pm

[Peter Damian]

I was asked to convey the following e-mail note to me from Richard ("Chase me ladies..."):

As to the 'Arbcom controls content' and 'top Wikipedia contributor' nonsense that the BBC decided to put up, I had no part in that. You know how the press works.

Er excuse me. You say "The arbitration committee deal with very very top end content disputes" at 1:01. Anyone who knows how the press works knows that they never fool around with your actual words. And those were your actual words. You didn't have to say that, but you did.

Liar. Typical member of Arbcom.

It will be interesting to see if a "top end" position at Wikipedia is subject to the same standards or will his fibbing be excused by Jimbo the way it originally was for Essjay?

Duh.

[SB_Johnny]

Is anyone else vicariously blushing for this guy?

You'd think they'd do at least a little teeny bit of vetting after the essjay thing.

[Ottava]

Mods, why is this in a public forum? Shouldn't it be somewhere like BLP forum?

This doesn't seem to have anything to do with his activities. I came here expecting something and I see nothing.

We have Arbitrators who plagiarize. We have arbitrators who have sex websites. We have arbitrators who have all sorts of ethical problems.

Military related issues have little to do with maintaining an encyclopedia and upholding encyclopedic standards. Are we to draw that he cannot be trusted because he puffed up his background in his youth? If so, then 99% of Wikimedians can't be trusted.

How about some real issues. Out of all the Arbitrators, I think he is probably someone I could actually respected or, at least, tolerate. Many of them have demonstrated some of the worse possible behavior on Wiki or off Wiki.

And who cares if he doesn't have a job. I don't care. I would predict that most editors here don't have a job. The ones that do, like Thekohser have internet related work that explains why they are here. Hell, much of my activity here and online was to subsidize my boredom between putting out campaign propaganda on message boards and news sites.


But in short, I am bothered that so many people take pot shots about an identified person while hiding behind fake names. So many people are fast and loose with other people's personal details while hiding their own. Can we implement a rule that anyone who reveals other people's info has their IP revealed and their email they used to registered here revealed?

I mean, come on. How do we know that some of these people doing it aren't prominent wikimedians just doing it all for political gain? We do we know that someone who would go after The Cavalry is not, say, another Arbitrator who wants to get rid of a rival? There seems to be no legitimate reason to embarrass others while hiding behind a fake name. And about the Arbitrators - of the current ArbCom, about half have used WR and I know of at least two that used different names from their Wiki names. So, it isn't beyond reason to think it could happen.

[carbuncle]

"I don't like putting pictures of me in a uniform online because my job in the reserves obviously leaves me open to real-life attacks, not to mention stern words from my CO about 'security' and so on and so forth," says the man who has a picture of himself in uniform on his WP user page.

I wonder how that CO would feel about Richard claiming to be a Royal Navy lieutenant?

This post has been edited by carbuncle: Tue 18th January 2011, 7:43pm