Let's check in on the reformed Cirt Options

[carbuncle]

Remember when Cirt said:

accept that there has been significant criticism relating to my editing of certain pages relating to Scientology. I will do my best to take this criticism on-board, and adjust my future actions accordingly. To begin towards that process, I have gone ahead and removed 66 Scientology-related BLP pages from my watchlist. I am going to shift my focus away from this topic of Scientology in general, and of BLPs within this topic in particular.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 01:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

and

Comment: As stated here diff, I am going to avoid editing within the topic of Scientology, unless directly related to prior GA and FA projects. -- Cirt (talk) 01:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, that was weeks ago, and in a different calendar year, so I guess it would be unreasonable of me to hold Cirt to those statements. What has Cirt been up to in the first few days of 2011?

• voting "KEEP" on Scientology-related deletion discussion for Jenna Miscavige Hill
• voting "KEEP" on Scientology-related deletion discussion for Exscientologykids.com
• thanking someone for their work on an L Ron Hubbard book article
• thanking someone for their work on an anti-CoS activist Jenna Miscavige Hill article
• editing a Futurama episode dealing with "Robotology"
• editing the BLP of an actor who did a spoof of Cirt's arch-enemy Tom Cruise
• welcoming someone whose only recent edit (out of a total of two) is a supportive comment for Jenna Miscavige Hill on the talk page of their article
• continuing a conversation on the talk page of an article about a former Scientologist who committed suicide years after leaving Scientology
• supporting the renaming of a page about a Scientology-related medical clinic

Just about the only thing that Cirt did that isn't related to CoS is restoring a removed quote from a movie financed by the Moonies. I'm sure there is nothing wrong with having a highly negative review snippet in its own coloured box:

"Empty-headed Korean war epic produced by Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church."
—Leonard Maltin[2]

I mean, that's pretty neutral, right? I'm going to add something similar to the Sound of Music and see what kind of reception I get.

Cirt's statements about staying away from CoS stuff seemed to work in that people backed off the ARBSCI enforcement, but if Cirt can't keep away from it by themselves, it may be time for an intervention.

[rebelrouser]

On the hunger project Smee welcomes a user that hadn't edited for two years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Drzeus

Drzeus. Five edits in 2004 to add the alleged Werner Erhard connection to the HungerProject, two years later it has been removed and Smee adds a section about the alleged connection to werner

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=54350368

and then welcomes the two year old contributor that has not edited since 2004, what is that about?

She also adds a couple of links to

http://www.carolgiambalvo.com/index.html

Carol Giambalvo’s interest in cults and thought reform began in 1978 when her step-daughter began exhibiting a drastic personality change following becoming a devotee in ISKCON. She began researching cults and thought reform and lectured in local high schools, churches and civic organizations. The more information she gathered on the indoctrination processes and thought reform used in cults, the more concerns arose about her involvement in est and The Hunger Project. In 1983, she and her husband, Noel, left their associations with est, The Hunger Project and Sterling Institute and began a personal search for information to aid their recovery process.

Smee welcomes Affcarol

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Affcarol

Affcarol makes only COI contributions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Affcarol

This post has been edited by rebelrouser: Sun 23rd January 2011, 1:35am

[Cedric]

On the hunger project Smee welcomes a user that hadn't edited for two years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Drzeus

Drzeus. Five edits in 2004 to add the alleged Werner Erhard connection to the HungerProject, two years later it has been removed and Smee adds a section about the alleged connection to werner

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=54350368

and then welcomes the two year old contributor that has not edited since 2004, what is that about?
[snip]

Welcome to Wikipedia Review, rebelrouser.

Admittedly, what you point out here is rather weird, but then, Wikipedia and weird just naturally go together. Indeed, I can top this. About two months ago, I accidentally happened upon my old user talk page when I intended to access another page. There I found a message that had been left for me a few months earlier. The thing was, I hadn't edited WP since March 2007, over three years earlier. I don't believe that I had logged in for at least three years, either.

It could be nothing more than inattention, or perhaps some "wikipedians" actually believe WP is like the Hotel California: you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.

[rebelrouser]

On the hunger project Smee welcomes a user that hadn't edited for two years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Drzeus

Drzeus. Five edits in 2004 to add the alleged Werner Erhard connection to the HungerProject, two years later it has been removed and Smee adds a section about the alleged connection to werner

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=54350368

and then welcomes the two year old contributor that has not edited since 2004, what is that about?
[snip]

Welcome to Wikipedia Review, rebelrouser.

Admittedly, what you point out here is rather weird, but then, Wikipedia and weird just naturally go together. Indeed, I can top this. About two months ago, I accidentally happened upon my old user talk page when I intended to access another page. There I found a message that had been left for me a few months earlier. The thing was, I hadn't edited WP since March 2007, over three years earlier. I don't believe that I had logged in for at least three years, either.

It could be nothing more than inattention, or perhaps some "wikipedians" actually believe WP is like the Hotel California: you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.

June 2006 Smee wrote this all about Carol

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=59407142

the confusion about Smee is a man or a woman and about lengthy edit sessions is self explained , as she says, "she and her husband, Noel, left their associations with est, The Hunger Project and Sterling Institute and began a personal search for information to aid their recovery process" A husband and wife editing team.

Sterling Institute of Relationship. written by Smee http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&action=history

Carol Giambalvo

http://www.carolgiambalvo.com/index.html

won the Margaret Singer award

Margaret singer page

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Singer

written by Smee

This post has been edited by rebelrouser: Sun 23rd January 2011, 5:40am

[Somey]

the confusion about Smee is a man or a woman and about lengthy edit sessions is self explained , as she says, "she and her husband, Noel, left their associations with est, The Hunger Project and Sterling Institute and began a personal search for information to aid their recovery process" A husband and wife editing team.

You're saying that Cirt is Noel Giambalvo, or rather both Noel and Carol Giambalvo...? I don't think so. Cirt might be highly familiar with the Giambalvos or even know them personally, but the Giambalvos themselves just don't fit the profile. For one thing, they would realize after a few weeks of Wikipedia activity that they were becoming part of a cult themselves, and get the hell out!

Anyway, interesting speculation, and I hope you don't take my dismissal of it personally. There just has to be another explanation, though like I say you may very well be on the right track (FWIW).

[Jagärdu]

the confusion about Smee is a man or a woman and about lengthy edit sessions is self explained , as she says, "she and her husband, Noel, left their associations with est, The Hunger Project and Sterling Institute and began a personal search for information to aid their recovery process" A husband and wife editing team.

You're saying that Cirt is Noel Giambalvo, or rather both Noel and Carol Giambalvo...? I don't think so. Cirt might be highly familiar with the Giambalvos or even know them personally, but the Giambalvos themselves just don't fit the profile. For one thing, they would realize after a few weeks of Wikipedia activity that they were becoming part of a cult themselves, and get the hell out!

Anyway, interesting speculation, and I hope you don't take my dismissal of it personally. There just has to be another explanation, though like I say you may very well be on the right track (FWIW).

This is most likely Carol Giambalvo on Wikipedia. Interestingly, Cirt (as Smee) is the only editor to have edited her user page - here. There is definitely a familiarity there that extends beyond the Wiki.

Here's another interesting coincidence. Another anti-cult editor who was quite active in the Smee era, User:Tanaats, also edited the Giambalvo page. For instance here Tanaats picks up just minutes after Smee left off. What is more interesting is that Tanaats seems to have been quite active, until just a couple of months prior to the Smee/Cirt changeover, when he just disappeared into thin air - edit history. Is it possible that Cirt is both Taanats and Smee? Look at Taanats editing style. Anyone recognize the high volume of minor edits and vandalism reversions that the reformed Smee (aka Cirt) was known for the year before being made an admin? A comparison between Smee/Taanats (in combination) and Cirt might yield some insight. If, and its a big if, this idle speculation is correct it might not be a stretch to think that the new Cirt is a tag team, perhaps even of people *like* Carol and her husband.

This post has been edited by Jagärdu: Sat 12th February 2011, 2:46pm

[Milton Roe]

the confusion about Smee is a man or a woman and about lengthy edit sessions is self explained , as she says, "she and her husband, Noel, left their associations with est, The Hunger Project and Sterling Institute and began a personal search for information to aid their recovery process" A husband and wife editing team.

You're saying that Cirt is Noel Giambalvo, or rather both Noel and Carol Giambalvo...? I don't think so. Cirt might be highly familiar with the Giambalvos or even know them personally, but the Giambalvos themselves just don't fit the profile. For one thing, they would realize after a few weeks of Wikipedia activity that they were becoming part of a cult themselves, and get the hell out!

Anyway, interesting speculation, and I hope you don't take my dismissal of it personally. There just has to be another explanation, though like I say you may very well be on the right track (FWIW).

This is most likely Carol Giambalvo on Wikipedia. Interestingly, Cirt (as Smee) is the only editor to have edited her user page - here. There is definitely a familiarity there that extends beyond the Wiki.

Agreed, though I doubt very much they are the same person. Smee created the Carol Giambalvo bio (she's a former self-described Erhard cultist) with a lot of refs and info. THEN Smee (as you say) created both Affcarol's userpage AND talk page (both as single edits, which still stand). This was to allow Affcarol (T-C-L-K-R-D) to edit Carol Giambalvo's bio, for Affcarol is a SPA. Clearly, as has been suggested, Affcarol is Carol Giambalvo herself. However, not Smee/Cirt. One has to look at the edits that Affcarol THEN added to her own BLP after Smee had done creating it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&oldid=59407142

A lot of stuff is modified or erased as being outdated. If Smee is using "Affcarol" as a sock account for this purpose, he/she is doing a brilliant job, and a LOT of work adding stuff that the real person then goes and updates. This also seems rather too distant a contact for a husband/wife.

Incidently, where did CoS come in? The Giambalvos got into cult deprogramming via Erhard/EST/Landmark, not CoS, so far as I can tell. Have they branched out subsequently?

As somebody who stands outside this battle, I'm always sourly amused when some people who get sucked into Landmark or CoS, then go on to run "cult awareness" networks from the refuge of Christianity. There do exist some very cult-like Christian groups (in the sense of being isolative, controlling, and involved in all aspects of members' personal lives). And there exist people who seem to need this, like the submissives in dom/sub roles in S&M organizations. In a sense, like so many mental disorders, these is a problem of arrested development-- of children who in one way, never grew up and became full adults.

Some people not only CAN'T think for themselves, they actually don't WANT to think for themselves. It scares them. Causes PTSD and anxiety. If you take these people out of their regimented cult/fundamentalist deeply-organization-controlled lives, even the military/police/Catholic Church, their eyes bulge out and they flop about like fish brought up from the pressurized depths of the ocean. (Hey, Ottava? Isn't that swim bladder bulging out through your mouth sort of uncomfortable?)

One interesting thing is that many very-controlling organizations (think of the Amish or various flavors of Orthodox Jews) seem to exist, in part, to keep OCD people from going crazy. How? By giving them something to do. LOTS of rituals and repetitious work. When such people decompress, they need something ELSE to do. And too often, what they find these days, is a new life editing Wikipedia... And we see some of that in the cult-anticult wars on WP.

Anyway, Cirt/Smee's assistance (indeed handholding) to allow and protect a SPA account in their quest to edit their own bio on WP, is an outstanding example of organizational hypocrisy. Not everybody gets to do that.

[EricBarbour]

Some people not only CAN'T think for themselves, they actually don't WANT to think for themselves. It scares them. Causes PTSD and anxiety. If you take these people out of their regimented cult/fundamentalist deeply-organization-controlled lives, even the military/police/Catholic Church, their eyes bulge out and they flop about like fish brought up from the pressurized depths of the ocean. (Hey, Ottava? Isn't that swim bladder bulging out through your mouth sort of uncomfortable?)

Well put. The idea that some people are "born to be slaves" goes all the way back to Aristotle, but usually gets twisted by racial bigots. (Where is William Shockley when we need to abuse him?) But perhaps there is always a percentage of the population, of whatever racial makeup, that needs to belong to a social group, one that forces a false reality down their throats. Without a false reality, they go mad.

Wikipedia, I suspect, will someday be accused of being cultic in its basic nature. The actual operation of it is a hostile and erratic mess, but the Jimbo-luv and "positive energy" that appears whenever the word "Wikipedia" is uttered in mixed nerd company is remarkably similar to the blind rage that Scientologists show when defending Hubbard and Miscavige from their critics. Or Erhard fans (who still exist, though in small numbers), or TM fans, etc.

[Kelly Martin]

Wikipedia, I suspect, will someday be accused of being cultic in its basic nature. The actual operation of it is a hostile and erratic mess, but the Jimbo-luv and "positive energy" that appears whenever the word "Wikipedia" is uttered in mixed nerd company is remarkably similar to the blind rage that Scientologists show when defending Hubbard and Miscavige from their critics. Or Erhard fans (who still exist, though in small numbers), or TM fans, etc.

I have been at Capricon 31 the past few days (it's local to me so attending is just the price of the badge and the gas to drive there). I got into a heated, drawn out argument with some random guy over Wikipedia in which most of the usual assertions were repeated by the wikidefender. I'm not even sure he was an editor, either; one of the interesting things about Wikipedia-love is that it seems to be held far more widely than merely those who are actively involved in the site.

Then again, I've run into this as well with respect to Disney. I revile Disney, but I've learned that to express this opinion in many contexts is a near-guarantee of a hostile response from someone in the audience. Apparently it's "just wrong" not to like Disney's animated films.

[It's the blimp, Frank]

Then again, I've run into this as well with respect to Disney.

Do you think Jimbo will have his noggin cryogenically preserved?

[gomi]

Then again, I've run into this as well with respect to Disney.

Do you think Jimbo will have his noggin cryogenically preserved?

More likely a part of his anatomy somewhat below that.