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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Mantanmoreland socking
MaliceAforethought
post Fri 1st July 2011, 12:46am
Post #1


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



From thatcher131 at gmail.com Wed May 14 16:27:47 2008
From: thatcher131 at gmail.com (Thatcher131 Wikipedia)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 12:27:47 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
Message-ID: <14749c270805140927n726bd0cka5bcb305aa065fd8@mail.gmail.com>

I know several CUs have checked User:Bassettcat as a suspected
sockpuppet. I ran a new check today and I think he might have made a
significant slip. Or maybe I am just sleep-deprived.

Mantanmoreland:
*Edits exclusively from Verizon, apparently in New York City. The
majority of his IPs have server names of the format
"pool-xxxx-ny325.east.verizon.net". I don't think this is mobile
because a traceroute shows the immediate upstream servers have names
like "p3-0-0.dsl-rtr23.ny325.verizon-gni.net".
*Uses a common generic user agent indicating and up-to-date copy of
Firefox on Windows XP.

Bassettcat:
*Edits exclusively from Level 3 Communications in Chicago.
*Probably dial-up as the servers all have names like
"dialup-4.159.233.134.dial1.chicago1.level3.net".
*Generic user agent indicating MSIE 7 on Windows XP, with no toolbars
or enhancements.

!Except that Bassettcat made one edit yesterday from 151.202.75.88,
which is part of the same NYC Verzion pool that Mantanmoreland uses
(pool-151-202-75-88.ny325.east.verizon.net).

The timing is especially striking because he edits from the Chicago
dialup just minutes on either side of the Verizon edit.

* (diff) (hist) . . Insider trading . . 00:21 . . Bassettcat (Talk |
contribs | block) (CrimLaw)
IP: 4.159.235.108 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
* (diff) (hist) . . Securities fraud . . 00:18 . . Bassettcat (Talk |
contribs | block) (More apt)
IP: 151.202.75.88 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
* (diff) (hist) . . Securities fraud . . 00:15 . . Bassettcat (Talk |
contribs | block) (Law display)
IP: 4.159.235.50 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
* (diff) (hist) . . Naked short selling . . 00:12 . . Bassettcat (Talk
| contribs | block) (Finance box)
IP: 4.159.235.50 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)

If we can confirm somehow that these verizon IPs are dsl landlines and
not some form of wireless connection, then we will have a user in New
York who is going to the lengths of dialing long distance to a Chicago
dialup for the purposes of concealment, which has got to be a bad
thing even if it is not Mantanmoreland. But numerous people have
raised the suspicion based on his edits, and combined with such
concealment...?

Thatcher
--------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Mon May 19 10:33:36 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 03:33:36 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Current issues 5/19/2008
In-Reply-To: <4830292C.8070500@cox.net>
References: <4830292C.8070500@cox.net>
Message-ID: <48315780.7070403@cox.net>

I took a look at the emails to this list just in the last month. You
have, according to my count, *20* ban appeals with no replies to their
senders, plus 4 other issues that were urgent oversight, outing, or
threats-related requests at the time that received no response, as well
as 4 other miscellaneous issues, but ones that need responses (Carnildo,
NonvocalScream, Mantanmoreland sock, and Lar's oversight request). By
this measure, this mailing list receives an issue needing a decision and
response by ArbCom at a *net* rate of about one a day (since this
doesn't count the threads that were resolved in the last month, just the
~28 that are still outstanding after that time).

ArbCom simply has no approach at all for the problem. I know I am not an
arbitrator, but to offer some perspective, I would say that the
proliferation of these extra-arbitration duties is the single biggest
change between now and 2006 when I served, but I also observe that there
has been no discernible change in the way that ArbCom deals with those
duties at all, since I served long ago. I would think, at a minimum, the
AC should keep track of the requests it get and make sure they actually
get responses when necessary. (I have a list of all the outstanding
issues I listed above, at least.)

This is one reason I didn't just stick a list of all 30 open issues, but
tried to make an agenda based on priority, which seems to me to be a
methodology, at least. That way, if you do one ArbCom-related thing
today, you can make sure it's something else that another arbitrator
will do with their one arbitration-related task of the day, too, and
perhaps it'll get resolved. One thing I noticed in looking at all the
incoming mail in the last month is the wasted discussion from a
haphazard approach: most of these threads are appeals followed by one or
two responses ("This sounds like a good idea," "Does this guy have any
recent sockpuppets?") which then become a waste of ArbCom time when the
thread just dies and the person gets no response anyway. I'm not
suggesting that you need to follow my scheme or want my nagging (or want
me to be a "Secretary," as James hideously called me), but the system
needs to be reworked, and it's not the casework part, but the approach
to non-casework duties that needs work.

Dominic
----------
From paulaugust.wp at gmail.com Mon May 19 17:00:42 2008
From: paulaugust.wp at gmail.com (Paul August)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 13:00:42 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Current issues 5/19/2008
In-Reply-To: <48315780.7070403@cox.net>
References: <4830292C.8070500@cox.net> <48315780.7070403@cox.net>
Message-ID: <7D9E2AEA-66B1-41B4-B4CF-64628B271395@gmail.com>


On May 19, 2008, at 6:33 AM, Dmcdevit wrote:

> I took a look at the emails to this list just in the last month. You
> have, according to my count, *20* ban appeals with no replies to their
> senders, plus 4 other issues that were urgent oversight, outing, or
> threats-related requests at the time that received no response, as
> well
> as 4 other miscellaneous issues, but ones that need responses
> (Carnildo,
> NonvocalScream, Mantanmoreland sock, and Lar's oversight request). By
> this measure, this mailing list receives an issue needing a
> decision and
> response by ArbCom at a *net* rate of about one a day (since this
> doesn't count the threads that were resolved in the last month,
> just the
> ~28 that are still outstanding after that time).
>
> ArbCom simply has no approach at all for the problem. I know I am
> not an
> arbitrator, but to offer some perspective, I would say that the
> proliferation of these extra-arbitration duties is the single biggest
> change between now and 2006 when I served, but I also observe that
> there
> has been no discernible change in the way that ArbCom deals with those
> duties at all, since I served long ago. I would think, at a
> minimum, the
> AC should keep track of the requests it get and make sure they
> actually
> get responses when necessary. (I have a list of all the outstanding
> issues I listed above, at least.)
>
> This is one reason I didn't just stick a list of all 30 open
> issues, but
> tried to make an agenda based on priority, which seems to me to be a
> methodology, at least. That way, if you do one ArbCom-related thing
> today, you can make sure it's something else that another arbitrator
> will do with their one arbitration-related task of the day, too, and
> perhaps it'll get resolved. One thing I noticed in looking at all the
> incoming mail in the last month is the wasted discussion from a
> haphazard approach: most of these threads are appeals followed by
> one or
> two responses ("This sounds like a good idea," "Does this guy have any
> recent sockpuppets?") which then become a waste of ArbCom time when
> the
> thread just dies and the person gets no response anyway. I'm not
> suggesting that you need to follow my scheme or want my nagging (or
> want
> me to be a "Secretary," as James hideously called me), but the system
> needs to be reworked, and it's not the casework part, but the approach
> to non-casework duties that needs work.
>
> Dominic

I agree with all of the above. I've felt for some time that the
biggest improvement we could make would be to have a "Secretary" to
handle our email. The responsibilities would be to track and
acknowledge all the emails to the list, and provide additional
responses as appropriate. Even responses of the sort "The Committee
is not interested in considering an appeal at this time ..." I think
it needs to be an "official" position(s), appointed by the Committee
and announced to the community.

Paul August
----------
From steve-dunlop at nerstrand.net Mon May 19 18:03:53 2008
From: steve-dunlop at nerstrand.net (Steve Dunlop)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 11:03:53 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Current issues 5/19/2008 - OTRS
Message-ID: <20080519110353.d34e889e074bc96cc6dfd25a6a4f8894.f05045650a.wbe@email.secureserver.net>

The choice that we face is either:
a) To install a ticketing system like OTRS so that such requests can be
managed to closure in an organized fashion
b) To do something to reduce the volume of incoming requests

Were it not for the Adam Cuerden case, I would have said that it would
be an entirely reasonable position for us to take to refuse to hear
emailed ban appeals, since 99% are wholly without merit. The remaining
1% are important however.

I suggest we get an OTRS of our own (where we can handle the
adminsitration ourselves, so not that WMF one) installed and running.
----------
From thatcher131 at gmail.com Wed May 28 17:58:07 2008
From: thatcher131 at gmail.com (Thatcher131 Wikipedia)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 13:58:07 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
In-Reply-To: <14749c270805140927n726bd0cka5bcb305aa065fd8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <14749c270805140927n726bd0cka5bcb305aa065fd8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>

Any thoughts on this?

On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Thatcher131 Wikipedia
<thatcher131 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I know several CUs have checked User:Bassettcat as a suspected
> sockpuppet. I ran a new check today and I think he might have made a
> significant slip. Or maybe I am just sleep-deprived.
>
> Mantanmoreland:
> *Edits exclusively from Verizon, apparently in New York City. The
> majority of his IPs have server names of the format
> "pool-xxxx-ny325.east.verizon.net". I don't think this is mobile
> because a traceroute shows the immediate upstream servers have names
> like "p3-0-0.dsl-rtr23.ny325.verizon-gni.net".
> *Uses a common generic user agent indicating and up-to-date copy of
> Firefox on Windows XP.
>
> Bassettcat:
> *Edits exclusively from Level 3 Communications in Chicago.
> *Probably dial-up as the servers all have names like
> "dialup-4.159.233.134.dial1.chicago1.level3.net".
> *Generic user agent indicating MSIE 7 on Windows XP, with no toolbars
> or enhancements.
>
> !Except that Bassettcat made one edit yesterday from 151.202.75.88,
> which is part of the same NYC Verzion pool that Mantanmoreland uses
> (pool-151-202-75-88.ny325.east.verizon.net).
>
> The timing is especially striking because he edits from the Chicago
> dialup just minutes on either side of the Verizon edit.
>
> * (diff) (hist) . . Insider trading . . 00:21 . . Bassettcat (Talk |
> contribs | block) (CrimLaw)
> IP: 4.159.235.108 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
> NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
> * (diff) (hist) . . Securities fraud . . 00:18 . . Bassettcat (Talk |
> contribs | block) (More apt)
> IP: 151.202.75.88 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
> NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
> * (diff) (hist) . . Securities fraud . . 00:15 . . Bassettcat (Talk |
> contribs | block) (Law display)
> IP: 4.159.235.50 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
> NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
> * (diff) (hist) . . Naked short selling . . 00:12 . . Bassettcat (Talk
> | contribs | block) (Finance box)
> IP: 4.159.235.50 Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows
> NT 5.1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727)
>
> If we can confirm somehow that these verizon IPs are dsl landlines and
> not some form of wireless connection, then we will have a user in New
> York who is going to the lengths of dialing long distance to a Chicago
> dialup for the purposes of concealment, which has got to be a bad
> thing even if it is not Mantanmoreland. But numerous people have
> raised the suspicion based on his edits, and combined with such
> concealment...?
>
> Thatcher
>
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Wed May 28 18:39:12 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 14:39:12 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
In-Reply-To: <14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>
References: <14749c270805140927n726bd0cka5bcb305aa065fd8@mail.gmail.com>
<14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700805281139w60a250b7te72944a536473f23@mail.gmail.com>

CU 151.202.75.0/24

On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 1:58 PM, Thatcher131 Wikipedia
<thatcher131 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Any thoughts on this?
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Thatcher131 Wikipedia
> <thatcher131 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I know several CUs have checked User:Bassettcat as a suspected
-----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Wed May 28 18:47:13 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 19:47:13 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
In-Reply-To: <14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>
References: <14749c270805140927n726bd0cka5bcb305aa065fd8@mail.gmail.com>
<14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <483da85c.2233440a.7518.ffffab2c@mx.google.com>

Will have results on this in about 4 hours when I get home.

FT2


-----Original Message-----
From: arbcom-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:arbcom-l-bounces at lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Thatcher131
Wikipedia
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 6:58 PM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)

Any thoughts on this?
-----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Wed May 28 18:59:06 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 19:59:06 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
In-Reply-To: <14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>
References: <14749c270805140927n726bd0cka5bcb305aa065fd8@mail.gmail.com>
<14749c270805281058j754a1b1bvf976e5e7d73bae20@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <483dab27.1636440a.6a75.ffffb6a2@mx.google.com>

I've checked all IP ranges associated with Bassetcat. He edits exclusively
from Chicago Level3.

Except as Thatcher notes, on one occasion:


4.159.235.108 --> dialup-4.159.235.108.Dial1.Chicago1.Level3.net
14/05/2008 00:21 --> Bassettcat --> Insider trading
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...id=15368&diff=2
12240964&oldid=211897668

151.202.75.88 --> pool-151-202-75-88.ny325.east.verizon.net
14/05/2008 00:18 --> Bassettcat --> Securities fraud
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rid=2902209&dif
f=212240407&oldid=212239892

4.159.235.50 --> dialup-4.159.235.50.Dial1.Chicago1.Level3.net
14/05/2008 00:15 --> Bassettcat --> Securities fraud
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...rid=2902209&dif
f=212239892&oldid=211897649

4.159.235.50 --> dialup-4.159.235.50.Dial1.Chicago1.Level3.net
14/05/2008 00:12 --> Bassettcat --> Naked short selling
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...&curid=3898531&
diff=212239430&oldid=211290725


Crossref:

151.202.75.19 --> pool-151-202-75-19.ny325.east.verizon.net
17/03/2008 13:45 --> Mantanmoreland --> User talk:Mantanmoreland
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...eland&curid=698
8028&diff=198853016&oldid=198809421



Quack. Any chance of a frame-up as was previously suggested at RFAR? Or do
we go with the obvious interpretation, given just how closely the IPs match?


FT2
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Wed May 28 19:24:27 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 20:24:27 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] FW: Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
Message-ID: <483db111.09a1660a.30e7.7aa1@mx.google.com>

Forwarded to arb-l, and, unless anyone objects we treat this as confirmed?

FT2



-----Original Message-----
From: Thatcher131 Wikipedia [mailto:thatcher131 at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 8:14 PM
To: FT2.wiki at gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)

>
> Quack. Any chance of a frame-up as was previously suggested at RFAR? Or do
> we go with the obvious interpretation, given just how closely the IPs
match?
>
> FT2

Note that Bassett's slip-up on May 14 came *after I had answered the
RFCU against him as "unrelated" on May 5, so in order to be a
frame-up, the framer would have had to be clairvoyant to know that I
would recheck privately on my own initiative, or would have to have
made the Verizon edit, then emailed me to request a recheck, which did
not happen.

Thatcher
----------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Thu May 29 00:15:05 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 17:15:05 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] FW: Mantanmoreland? oh bugger (enwiki)
In-Reply-To: <483db111.09a1660a.30e7.7aa1@mx.google.com>
References: <483db111.09a1660a.30e7.7aa1@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <483DF589.7000500@cox.net>

Certainly not confirmed, at least in the way we use "confirmed" at RFCU
(meaning the IP evidence actually ties them conclusively). It is
definitely suggestive though, and looking at the behavior (which I
haven't done) may seal the deal. Keep in mind that Verizon in NYC is a
big pool of IPs. I would check the single NYC IP used by Bassett in case
it's a proxy of some type that Bassett used, and only happened to be in
Mantanmoreland's range. We might also have to consider the possibility
that it's more than one person. Has anyone asked Bassett if he can
explain why his IP changed to a NYC one in too short a time frame to
have actually traveled?

Dominic

FT2 wrote:
> Forwarded to arb-l, and, unless anyone objects we treat this as confirmed?
>
> FT2
----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Thu May 29 03:20:36 2008
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 03:20:36 +0000
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Possible additional socks related to Mantanmoreland case
Message-ID: <eb45e7c0805282020x490da25n441fdc729e3e5b92@mail.gmail.com>

I note the following obviously alternative accounts who have been editing in
relation to the Mantanmoreland case. I don't presume to know the identities
of those behind the accounts and will leave that for arbitrators/checkusers
to determine, as they see fit.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/Comployeah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Snowies (claimed as
primary account by Comployeah)


(You may already be well aware of these; I just want to make sure these
accounts don't slip through the cracks when other issues are being dealt
with.)

Best,
Risker
----------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Thu May 29 12:58:33 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 05:58:33 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Possible additional socks related to Mantanmoreland
case
In-Reply-To: <eb45e7c0805282020x490da25n441fdc729e3e5b92@mail.gmail.com>
References: <eb45e7c0805282020x490da25n441fdc729e3e5b92@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <483EA879.70008@cox.net>

Risker wrote:
> I note the following obviously alternative accounts who have been
> editing in relation to the Mantanmoreland case. I don't presume to
> know the identities of those behind the accounts and will leave that
> for arbitrators/checkusers to determine, as they see fit.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pwntjuice
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/Comployeah
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Snowies (claimed as
> primary account by Comployeah)
>
>
> (You may already be well aware of these; I just want to make sure
> these accounts don't slip through the cracks when other issues are
> being dealt with.)
>
> Best,
> Risker
>
>

Both are clear matches with CheckUser. The latter two are Dereks1x, and
the first one is WordBomb, along with the edits made by
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/70.192.164.228>.

Dominic
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MaliceAforethought
post Fri 1st July 2011, 12:54am
Post #2


u Mad?
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue 21st Jun 2011, 6:54am
From: Wonderland
Member No.: 57,801



From jayjg99 at gmail.com Thu May 29 14:31:30 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:31:30 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Possible additional socks related to Mantanmoreland
case
In-Reply-To: <483EA879.70008@cox.net>
References: <eb45e7c0805282020x490da25n441fdc729e3e5b92@mail.gmail.com>
<483EA879.70008@cox.net>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700805290731o74d686cao311a6ef11e121f28@mail.gmail.com>

So is someone going to tag and block them?

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Dmcdevit <dmcdevit at cox.net> wrote:
> Risker wrote:
>> I note the following obviously alternative accounts who have been
>> editing in relation to the Mantanmoreland case. I don't presume to
>> know the identities of those behind the accounts and will leave that
>> for arbitrators/checkusers to determine, as they see fit.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pwntjuice
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ions/Comployeah
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Snowies (claimed as
>> primary account by Comployeah)
>>
>>
>> (You may already be well aware of these; I just want to make sure
>> these accounts don't slip through the cracks when other issues are
>> being dealt with.)
>>
>> Best,
>> Risker
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Thu May 29 15:22:21 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:22:21 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Possible additional socks related to
Mantanmoreland case
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700805290731o74d686cao311a6ef11e121f28@mail.gmail.com>
References: <eb45e7c0805282020x490da25n441fdc729e3e5b92@mail.gmail.com> <483EA879.70008@cox.net>
<6a8d9d700805290731o74d686cao311a6ef11e121f28@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <483eca52.2435440a.2da9.4f3b@mx.google.com>

Can anyone else familiar with Dereks1x or (especially) WordBomb, verify/deal
with any of these?

I'm loath to block on a contentious case with a sockmaster I don't have
experience of modus and identification.

Thanks

Paul.
-----------
From user.jpgordon at gmail.com Thu May 29 16:49:45 2008
From: user.jpgordon at gmail.com (Josh Gordon)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:49:45 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Possible additional socks related to Mantanmoreland
case
In-Reply-To: <483eca52.2435440a.2da9.4f3b@mx.google.com>
References: <eb45e7c0805282020x490da25n441fdc729e3e5b92@mail.gmail.com>
<483EA879.70008@cox.net>
<6a8d9d700805290731o74d686cao311a6ef11e121f28@mail.gmail.com>
<483eca52.2435440a.2da9.4f3b@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <99c65f730805290949i60cc68fcx41c464f3f5d99ec0@mail.gmail.com>

If Dmcdevit says it's Dereks1x, he's correct. Likewise WordBomb. Dmcdevit is
sufficiently familiar with these nuisances to recognize them accurately.

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 8:22 AM, FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:

> Can anyone else familiar with Dereks1x or (especially) WordBomb,
> verify/deal
> with any of these?
----------
From szvest at gmail.com Thu May 29 19:57:43 2008
From: szvest at gmail.com (Fayssal F.)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 19:57:43 +0000
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Possible additional socks related to Mantanmoreland
case
Message-ID: <2a8c5680805291257p7255a53dlf1632230da0de7e0@mail.gmail.com>

Done. FT2 and East718 have just blocked them.

Fayssal F.
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Thu May 29 20:06:47 2008
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:06:47 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
Message-ID: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>

In a current thread on WR, WordBomb claims he has not contributed to English
Wikipedia in several months, although he has participated in another project
(Spanish WP).

I received a very kind note from him the other day expressing regret for my
own current situation, and I am tempted to believe his current assurances
unless the technical evidence is really incontrovertible. I know that I am
going to be mocked as the person who "even after he was forced to leave,
still AGF's even to WordBomb," but please make sure the evidence here is
checked very carefully before any action is taken.

IBM
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Thu May 29 20:28:01 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:28:01 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700805291328p7450567ej1fa9eab297f7c997@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<newyorkbrad at gmail.com> wrote:
> In a current thread on WR, WordBomb claims he has not contributed to English
> Wikipedia in several months, although he has participated in another project
> (Spanish WP).
>
> I received a very kind note from him the other day expressing regret for my
> own current situation, and I am tempted to believe his current assurances
> unless the technical evidence is really incontrovertible. I know that I am
> going to be mocked as the person who "even after he was forced to leave,
> still AGF's even to WordBomb," but please make sure the evidence here is
> checked very carefully before any action is taken.
>
> IBM

Is he saying that these two aren't him?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr.../70.192.164.228
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pwntjuice
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Thu May 29 20:35:39 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 21:35:39 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140805291335x327d9358oa1d4cc257a57110@mail.gmail.com>

2008/5/29 Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <newyorkbrad at gmail.com>:

> I received a very kind note from him the other day expressing regret for my
> own current situation, and I am tempted to believe his current assurances
> unless the technical evidence is really incontrovertible. I know that I am
> going to be mocked as the person who "even after he was forced to leave,
> still AGF's even to WordBomb," but please make sure the evidence here is
> checked very carefully before any action is taken.


If Judd Bagley said the sky was blue, I would assume thunderstorms
until I could get to a window to look.


- d.
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Thu May 29 20:58:04 2008
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:58:04 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140805291335x327d9358oa1d4cc257a57110@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
<fbad4e140805291335x327d9358oa1d4cc257a57110@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c52819d30805291358j70f94adbpccfe092e8906caad@mail.gmail.com>

On 5/29/08, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2008/5/29 Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <newyorkbrad at gmail.com>:
>
> > I received a very kind note from him the other day expressing regret for
> my
> > own current situation, and I am tempted to believe his current assurances
> > unless the technical evidence is really incontrovertible. I know that I
> am
> > going to be mocked as the person who "even after he was forced to leave,
> > still AGF's even to WordBomb," but please make sure the evidence here is
> > checked very carefully before any action is taken.
>
> If Judd Bagley said the sky was blue, I would assume thunderstorms
> until I could get to a window to look.
>
> - d.



His post of a couple of hours ago is in the "Mantanmoreland socking again"
thread on WR. Sorry I'm not sure how to link directly to it.

B.
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Fri May 30 09:46:56 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:46:56 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com>

Self explanatory incoming and outgoing cademail. "Ugh".

This really was a non-event as a case, so emphasizing the boringness of it, "nothing to see here, no real speculation from me, a lot of people over reacted and what else is there to say", seems the most sensible answer. /Shrug/. And as with any media inquiry, avoid saying anything that can be turned into statements that are actually not what's being said.

I'd avoid responding to him entirely, but I think that's probably unhelpful. Zero interest in either talking to anyone or making it a big deal. The whole focus of his case was to help the community not over-react in the first place.

Anyway, for your info. See below for his email.





-----Original Message-----
From: Cade Metz [cmetz at theregister.com]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 5:31 AM
To: FT2
Subject: Chat about Mantanmoreland?

Hello: My name is Cade Metz, and I'm a reporter in San Francisco with The Register (www.theregister.co.uk). Would you be willing to chat about the latest incident involving the Mantanmoreland account? Am putting together a follow-up to an earlier story I wrote about the whole Overstock.com-Wikipedia controversy.

Thanks,

Cade Metz
The Register, in San Francisco
415-874-3130



EMAIL:

Hi, and sure. I'm not sure what there is to say about it, but sure.

I am curious though, Mantanmoreland's case isn't in any way a big deal, or a media issue. Administrators issue blocks for this kind of thing at the rate of maybe dozens a day, probably, and I've never heard of one being a media matter. My assumption is therefore, from your question, that someone has an interest in making this one a news item (whether it's got news value or not) - either for him, or against him.

What's the driver behind it, and (if you know it) the agenda? I'd be interested.

Best,


EMAIL:

Thinking about it, the dispute can be summed up in a few sentences roughly like this:
Two people with some kind of battle going on off-site, decide to use Wikipedia as their battleground for their PR campaign. Both get caught and dealt with. Life carries on. We deal with cases like this as routine.
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Fri May 30 09:54:23 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:54:23 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain>
<483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com>

2008/5/30 FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com>:

> Thinking about it, the dispute can be summed up in a few sentences roughly like this:
> Two people with some kind of battle going on off-site, decide to use Wikipedia as their battleground for their PR campaign. Both get caught and dealt with. Life carries on. We deal with cases like this as routine.


Feeding Cade Metz anything is fraught with hazards, i.e. that he's an
ad-banner troll. I suggest considering to what degree any particular
communication with him furthers the goals of the project itself. (In
almost all cases, talking to the press does further those goals or can
be used to; I personally feel Mr Metz isn't such a case.)


- d.
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Fri May 30 14:12:24 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 10:12:24 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain>
<483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com>
<fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700805300712w1cb7c976h4033d09160135de3@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 5:54 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/5/30 FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com>:
>
>> Thinking about it, the dispute can be summed up in a few sentences roughly like this:
>> Two people with some kind of battle going on off-site, decide to use Wikipedia as their battleground for their PR campaign. Both get caught and dealt with. Life carries on. We deal with cases like this as routine.
>
>
> Feeding Cade Metz anything is fraught with hazards, i.e. that he's an
> ad-banner troll. I suggest considering to what degree any particular
> communication with him furthers the goals of the project itself. (In
> almost all cases, talking to the press does further those goals or can
> be used to; I personally feel Mr Metz isn't such a case.)

I'd have to agree. From what I've seen his articles are poorly
researched, contain significant inaccuracies (whether deliberate or
not is unclear), and in general are intended only to denigrate
Wikipedia.
----------
From dmcdevit at cox.net Fri May 30 15:05:31 2008
From: dmcdevit at cox.net (Dmcdevit)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 08:05:31 -0700
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700805291328p7450567ej1fa9eab297f7c997@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805291328p7450567ej1fa9eab297f7c997@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <484017BB.3010008@cox.net>

jayjg wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
> <newyorkbrad at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In a current thread on WR, WordBomb claims he has not contributed to English
>> Wikipedia in several months, although he has participated in another project
>> (Spanish WP).
>>
>> I received a very kind note from him the other day expressing regret for my
>> own current situation, and I am tempted to believe his current assurances
>> unless the technical evidence is really incontrovertible. I know that I am
>> going to be mocked as the person who "even after he was forced to leave,
>> still AGF's even to WordBomb," but please make sure the evidence here is
>> checked very carefully before any action is taken.
>>
>> IBM
>>
>
> Is he saying that these two aren't him?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr.../70.192.164.228
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Pwntjuice
>

I haven't seen a Bagley sock in a while before now, but those are on the
same Cellco he's used in the past, according to my records. I am happy
to have another CheckUser more familiar with WordBomb socks check, if
need be. It doesn't really matter who it is, in my opinion, though; the
account was an obvious sock, whoever it was, and WordBomb isn't the sort
of banned user that we need to worry about resetting his ban timer as if
he's going to be unbanned any time soon, so we could just as easily
block it as "disruptive sock" and forget about it.

Dominic
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Fri May 30 18:04:56 2008
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia))
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:04:56 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <484017BB.3010008@cox.net>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805291328p7450567ej1fa9eab297f7c997@mail.gmail.com>
<484017BB.3010008@cox.net>
Message-ID: <c52819d30805301104m7da8d25apb8097f89e8d4415f@mail.gmail.com>

On WR, WordBomb has more-or-less pleaded "nolo contendre" to this one.

IBM


On 5/30/08, Dmcdevit <dmcdevit at cox.net> wrote:
>
> jayjg wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:06 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
> > <newyorkbrad at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In a current thread on WR, WordBomb claims he has not contributed to
----------
From jayjg99 at gmail.com Fri May 30 18:34:36 2008
From: jayjg99 at gmail.com (jayjg)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 14:34:36 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <c52819d30805301104m7da8d25apb8097f89e8d4415f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805291328p7450567ej1fa9eab297f7c997@mail.gmail.com>
<484017BB.3010008@cox.net>
<c52819d30805301104m7da8d25apb8097f89e8d4415f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6a8d9d700805301134k4f11f238x40ddd07566362c2a@mail.gmail.com>

So, he hasn't socked except when he's socked.

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<newyorkbrad at gmail.com> wrote:
> On WR, WordBomb has more-or-less pleaded "nolo contendre" to this one.
>
> IBM
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Fri May 30 18:40:17 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 19:40:17 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Mantanmoreland/WordBomb
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700805301134k4f11f238x40ddd07566362c2a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c52819d30805291306n5c71f07cvf28b668fc0b182bc@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805291328p7450567ej1fa9eab297f7c997@mail.gmail.com>
<484017BB.3010008@cox.net>
<c52819d30805301104m7da8d25apb8097f89e8d4415f@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805301134k4f11f238x40ddd07566362c2a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140805301140p6f71a948t1b63392f5ac0b6ee@mail.gmail.com>

2008/5/30 jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com>:

> So, he hasn't socked except when he's socked.


That's not a very loving attitude.



*cough*


- d.
----------
From mapellegrini at comcast.net Sun Jun 1 14:16:12 2008
From: mapellegrini at comcast.net (Mark Pellegrini)
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2008 10:16:12 -0400
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <6a8d9d700805300712w1cb7c976h4033d09160135de3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain> <483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com> <fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805300712w1cb7c976h4033d09160135de3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4842AF2C.7020703@comcast.net>

On the press committee mailing list, we have decided (based on past,
profoundly negative experiences) to treat Cade Metz as a special case.
Specifically, nobody is to respond to any inquiries from him -- just
forward them to Jay, and let Jay handle them. I think non-engagement is
the best thing to practice in this case.

-Mark
----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Sun Jun 1 15:46:02 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 16:46:02 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <4842AF2C.7020703@comcast.net>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain> <483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com> <fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com> <6a8d9d700805300712w1cb7c976h4033d09160135de3@mail.gmail.com>
<4842AF2C.7020703@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4842c43c.04e9300a.1a98.09ea@mx.google.com>

-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Mark Pellegrini
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 3:16 PM
To: Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.

On the press committee mailing list, we have decided (based on past,
profoundly negative experiences) to treat Cade Metz as a special case.
Specifically, nobody is to respond to any inquiries from him -- just
forward them to Jay, and let Jay handle them. I think non-engagement is
the best thing to practice in this case.

-Mark



I might try on this one matter.

Specifically, Metz has got his case lined up, and such, so whatever's said
or not said will not make it any worse. I've tended to be good at working
even with people who don't check facts carefully, and I am tempted this
once, when there are good and simple answers, to say them.

I emailed him a brief reply saying basically, I'm okay fact-checking his
writing on the Mantanmoreland matter, PROVIDED 1/ approval of any quotes
used, 2/ enough context to see how they're used, and 3/ no hype -- no "uber
admin" or "ruling clique" idiocy on my part. He's stated agreement to
those. I also told him, first screw-up, forget it. Agreement emailed back.

Under those conditions I'm willing to try it once. I have one criteria of my
own - focus for me is the community. I would not say anything I haven't said
on-wiki already to the community, as that's what matters. No "special
favors", nothing the community doesn't know, no "special press anything". If
he wants to quote my existing words on wiki, that the community knows about
already, he's welcome. If I haven't written them and it'd help (he wants to
ask something), I'd put something on-wiki in my user space, as I would for
any user inquiry, and then link to it. My motive is, if there's going to be
an allegation in the press on a case I know about, I'm fine making sure I've
said something on it, on-wiki, somewhere appropriate (as I have at ANI to
date).

Under those circumstances and seeing his current Mantanmoreland questions
are in fact, pretty sensible ones, and he's already assumed in the past
about as bad it gets, I don't have much concern over trialling it that way
the once, even allowing for past his experience. I'm aware how badly words
can be twisted. I've done so with some success before, with other "very
difficult parties".
----------
From dgerard at gmail.com Sun Jun 1 15:50:45 2008
From: dgerard at gmail.com (David Gerard)
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 16:50:45 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <4842c43c.04e9300a.1a98.09ea@mx.google.com>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain>
<483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com>
<fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805300712w1cb7c976h4033d09160135de3@mail.gmail.com>
<4842AF2C.7020703@comcast.net>
<4842c43c.04e9300a.1a98.09ea@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <fbad4e140806010850h23941e27t3099e888287bba4d@mail.gmail.com>

2008/6/1 FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com>:

> Under those circumstances and seeing his current Mantanmoreland questions
> are in fact, pretty sensible ones, and he's already assumed in the past
> about as bad it gets, I don't have much concern over trialling it that way
> the once, even allowing for past his experience. I'm aware how badly words
> can be twisted. I've done so with some success before, with other "very
> difficult parties".


If you manage it, that'll be great ;-) Mr Metz is already having
trouble finding people who are still willing to talk to him - there's
an observed cycle of "talk to him, get burnt, swear never to deal with
him again". You *may* be the first ...

You should definitely forward your emails on the topic to Jay Walsh
(possibly for forwarding to the comcom list), so it isn't a surprise
to him. Cade Metz surprises induce stress ulcers.


- d.
-----------
From ft2.wiki at gmail.com Sun Jun 1 16:44:48 2008
From: ft2.wiki at gmail.com (FT2)
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 17:44:48 +0100
Subject: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.
In-Reply-To: <fbad4e140806010850h23941e27t3099e888287bba4d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200805300431.m4U4VMax005069@localhost.localdomain>
<483fcd12.2233440a.6bf0.ffff8d64@mx.google.com>
<fbad4e140805300254m1d48c89aqa0a9f681abf32535@mail.gmail.com>
<6a8d9d700805300712w1cb7c976h4033d09160135de3@mail.gmail.com>
<4842AF2C.7020703@comcast.net>
<4842c43c.04e9300a.1a98.09ea@mx.google.com>
<fbad4e140806010850h23941e27t3099e888287bba4d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4842d202.05ed300a.6a9c.2d0c@mx.google.com>

-----Original Message-----
From: David Gerard [mailto:dgerard at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 01, 2008 4:51 PM
To: FT2.wiki at gmail.com; Arbitration Committee mailing list
Subject: Re: [Arbcom-l] Cade Metz / Mantanmoreland.

(Snip)

You should definitely forward your emails on the topic to Jay Walsh
(possibly for forwarding to the comcom list), so it isn't a surprise
to him. Cade Metz surprises induce stress ulcers.

- d.


Yes. That's exactly the thinking behind emailing arb-l as well.


Paul.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sololol
post Fri 1st July 2011, 1:22am
Post #3


Bell the Cat
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun 10th Apr 2011, 6:32am
Member No.: 50,538

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Presumably I'm missing the back story where Cade Metz killed all of ArbCom's pets. Bonus points for exposing possibly libelous material.

This post has been edited by Sololol: Fri 1st July 2011, 1:25am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shalom
post Fri 1st July 2011, 1:51am
Post #4


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 878
Joined: Tue 1st Apr 2008, 4:00pm
Member No.: 5,566

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I've wondered what I would see if I could ever run checkusers. When I worked in sockpuppet investigations I felt frustrated that I didn't have the access, and I commented on FT2's talkpage that I'd like to run for checkuser if I ever got to be an admin. I can't believe I was so delusional.

Anyway, I was also delusional about Stetsonharry. It would be a fascinating exercise to compare the Arbcom list emails to what happened on Wikipedia about the same issues at the same time. For example, we now know that Ecoleetage harassed the real-world "S. Dean Jameson", but we DID NOT KNOW onwiki that "S. Dean Jameson" was a pseudonym; it sounded realistic. (I also did not know that "Paul August" was a pseudonym until I met him in Boston at a meetup. His real name is Timothy.) I find this exercise particularly helpful as I reminisce about my miniscule role in the epic Mantanmoreland sockpuppet investigation, a process that has occupied the checkuser forces more than two years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sus.../Mantanmoreland

I cite here the endgame:

QUOTE

Based on subsequent editing, checkuser data now reveals that Bassettcat is a sockpuppet of Mantanmoreland. (Stetsonharry remaining open at this time stamp.) GRBerry 15:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to go on the record as saying Stetsonharry is probably not Mantanmoreland, but he might be. I think the threshold of proving that he is Mantanmoreland has not been met. Also, I observe that Bassettcat edited his userpage at 14:03 on May 17, 2008 between two edits by Stetsonharry at 14:01 and 14:07. [7] It's possible that Mantanmoreland would have done that just to throw me off, but it's more likely that these are two different people. If it really is Mantanmoreland, eventually he'll do something stupid, and then we'll know it's him. Until then, I think the operative assumption is that this is someone else who happens to agree with Mantanmoreland on the Patrick Byrne article dispute. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Closing, while Bassettcat is for sure Mantanmoreland, I am not convinced Stetsonharry is. We'll wait as Shalom suggests. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


Stetsonharry was blocked more than a year later as a sockpuppet of JohnnyB256, who in turn is a sockpuppet of Mantanmoreland. I guess Stetsonharry did "something stupid." But so did I, for not catching him earlier when I had the chance. I vaguely remember feeling a sense of remorse a few weeks after that edit, thinking that I might have allowed the bad guy to get away. I never felt that way about any of my other judgments in sockpuppet investigations - including Poetlister.

I should note that, upon reviewing my first thread at WR about innocent users blocked under the pretense of being sockpuppets, I wrote that Poetlister was in fact part of the sockfarm, and was blocked correctly. PoetGuy's sockpuppets and supporters ganged up on me, and I got fooled into doubting my initial conclusion. In hindsight, my first unbiased impression was the correct one. The claim that ArbCom's opinion had biased me turned out to be ridiculous in hindsight. I also received an email message from Dmcdevit a.k.a. Dominic, saying that checkuser had confirmed everything in multiple instances.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SpiderAndWeb
post Fri 1st July 2011, 1:58am
Post #5


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue 28th Jun 2011, 5:02pm
Member No.: 58,319



The most interesting revelation here is the surprising display of sound sense by Dmcdevit. Which the arbs completely ignore, naturally.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikileaker
post Fri 1st July 2011, 4:28am
Post #6


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri 15th Feb 2008, 7:07pm
Member No.: 4,864



I've always found him and Thatcher to be the most sane people posting on checkuser-L/arbcom-L.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
the fieryangel
post Fri 1st July 2011, 7:24am
Post #7


the Internet Review Corporation is watching you...
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,990
Joined: Tue 21st Nov 2006, 9:49pm
From: It's all in your mind anyway...
Member No.: 577



Has anybody told Cade Metz about this post? He might be interested in reading it.

Hmm, was anything every mentioned about Owen Thomas, post Carolyn Doran and Valley Wag's Moeller articles?

What about Seth? Other members of the press?

It's amazing how these people act as if they're some sort of State which needs to have diplomatic relations with "foreign powers"....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Fri 1st July 2011, 11:54am
Post #8


Bring back the guttersnipes!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined: Sun 22nd Jun 2008, 4:41am
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696



QUOTE(the fieryangel @ Fri 1st July 2011, 2:24am) *
It's amazing how these people act as if they're some sort of State which needs to have diplomatic relations with "foreign powers"....
Not all that amazing. A significant portion of Wikipedia's early adopters were believers in the theory that cyberspace is extraterritorial and that websites, and their communities, exist outside the scope of territorial legal boundaries and enjoy at least some measure of sovereignty. This belief is, of course, ridiculous, but it was, and is yet still today, widely held within the Wikipedian mindset.

It also plays into Jimbo's delusions (or aspersions) of royalty.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Abd
post Fri 1st July 2011, 7:19pm
Post #9


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,915
Joined: Tue 18th Nov 2008, 10:52pm
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I'm fascinated to see the idea of an ArbComm "secretary" to see that requests don't fall into the cracks.

To follow wikipractice, assuming only volunteer work, this should actually be multiple trusted users, but there should be duty periods, where the individual secretary promises to promptly review all traffic from that period. Secretaries would be appointed by majority vote, or possibly by two-thirds vote.

But the change that would radically transform ArbComm would be if arbs appointed their own clerks, to do tasks such as investigate. Twere it up to me, clerks could be assigned advanced privileges, on the authority of an individual arb, who would be responsible for all activity by the clerk. Were I an arb, I'd name several uses whom I trusted completely, and would set up a process for complaints. These clerks would not use any special privileges assigned to them ex-officio, rather than through normal process, for anything other than as directed by the arbitrator. If they did, or appeared to do so, this would be grounds for immediate suspension of the privileges, and my own position as an arb would be at stake for failure to supervise adequately.

But, with the help of clerks, I'd be far more effective than standing alone. Arbs could also share clerks, and clerking like this would be an excellent preparation for later becoming an arbitrator.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SpiderAndWeb
post Fri 1st July 2011, 7:45pm
Post #10


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue 28th Jun 2011, 5:02pm
Member No.: 58,319



QUOTE(Abd @ Fri 1st July 2011, 7:19pm) *

I'm fascinated to see the idea of an ArbComm "secretary" to see that requests don't fall into the cracks.

To follow wikipractice, assuming only volunteer work, this should actually be multiple trusted users, but there should be duty periods, where the individual secretary promises to promptly review all traffic from that period. Secretaries would be appointed by majority vote, or possibly by two-thirds vote.

But the change that would radically transform ArbComm would be if arbs appointed their own clerks, to do tasks such as investigate. Twere it up to me, clerks could be assigned advanced privileges, on the authority of an individual arb, who would be responsible for all activity by the clerk. Were I an arb, I'd name several uses whom I trusted completely, and would set up a process for complaints. These clerks would not use any special privileges assigned to them ex-officio, rather than through normal process, for anything other than as directed by the arbitrator. If they did, or appeared to do so, this would be grounds for immediate suspension of the privileges, and my own position as an arb would be at stake for failure to supervise adequately.

But, with the help of clerks, I'd be far more effective than standing alone. Arbs could also share clerks, and clerking like this would be an excellent preparation for later becoming an arbitrator.


No. The Committee does far too much "investigation" already. The last thing we need are a posse of even more incompetent deputies running around, above the law, "helping."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Piperdown
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 12:25am
Post #11


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,613
Joined: Mon 10th Sep 2007, 3:09pm
Member No.: 2,995



David gerard was embarrassed by Judd Bagley. Ones a liar and the others a boyscout Mormon. Never saw Judd lie about anything, anywhere. Gerard, on the other hand, is a wanker.

This post has been edited by Piperdown: Sat 2nd July 2011, 12:26am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:20am
Post #12


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Piperdown @ Fri 1st July 2011, 5:25pm) *

David gerard was embarrassed by Judd Bagley. Ones a liar and the others a boyscout Mormon. Never saw Judd lie about anything, anywhere. Gerard, on the other hand, is a wanker.

So are boyscout Mormons. ermm.gif

smile.gif


But I know what you mean. I think.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Abd
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:22am
Post #13


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,915
Joined: Tue 18th Nov 2008, 10:52pm
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(SpiderAndWeb @ Fri 1st July 2011, 3:45pm) *

No. The Committee does far too much "investigation" already. The last thing we need are a posse of even more incompetent deputies running around, above the law, "helping."
What I've suggested would improve competence, it wouldn't make it worse. As this would obviously help arbitrators be more effective, and as it is not against policy, at all, properly done, this does not require *our* approval. As I described the role of clerk, they would very much not be "above the law." They would not block users, for example; the only reason they might need advanced permissions would be to read deleted contributions, and this function could still exist without that.

However, I'll present a contrary view.

It's obvious that ArbComm is acting as a power center, the arbs, in many messages, discuss action to take that is entirely divorced from their function as the "court of last resort" on Wikipedia. They are, instead, serving as a star chamber, leaving behind the much more limited role as *arbitrators* in *disputes*. They are *initiating* action, being plaintiff, prosecutor, judge, and executioner all under one hat.

However, the clerking function I've described was intended for function within the quasi-judicial role. The executive role that arbs have usurped is not legitimate, and, my opinion, arbs should not function as ordinary admins, blocking users, etc., outside of emergencies.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 1:36am
Post #14


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Abd @ Fri 1st July 2011, 6:22pm) *

It's obvious that ArbComm is acting as a power center, the arbs, in many messages, discuss action to take that is entirely divorced from their function as the "court of last resort" on Wikipedia. They are, instead, serving as a star chamber, leaving behind the much more limited role as *arbitrators* in *disputes*. They are *initiating* action, being plaintiff, prosecutor, judge, and executioner all under one hat.


Did you really think that because they're called "abitrators," that they really are arbitrators or act as arbitrators? Have you not read WP:NOT, where there is a rabbit hole list of stuff that WP is, which it is claimed NOT to be? In Orwell's 1984, Minilove (Ministry of Love) is in charge of torture. Much as any country called the Democratic Republic of Something is generally a dictatorship. On Wikipedia, WP:ARB is indeed in charge of adjudication and punishment. Yes, WP:ARB: when they say "binding arbitration" they mean "like with leather straps."


User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Abd
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 2:08am
Post #15


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,915
Joined: Tue 18th Nov 2008, 10:52pm
From: Northampton, MA, USA
Member No.: 9,019

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 1st July 2011, 9:36pm) *
QUOTE(Abd @ Fri 1st July 2011, 6:22pm) *
It's obvious that ArbComm is acting as a power center, the arbs, in many messages, discuss action to take that is entirely divorced from their function as the "court of last resort" on Wikipedia. They are, instead, serving as a star chamber, leaving behind the much more limited role as *arbitrators* in *disputes*. They are *initiating* action, being plaintiff, prosecutor, judge, and executioner all under one hat.
Did you really think that because they're called "abitrators," that they really are arbitrators or act as arbitrators?
Did you really think I'm stupid? My point is, indeed, that they do not arbitrate, they make decisions as an executive committee, deliberating mostly in secrecy, with only a limited posturing revealed.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 2:36am
Post #16


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Abd @ Fri 1st July 2011, 7:08pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 1st July 2011, 9:36pm) *
QUOTE(Abd @ Fri 1st July 2011, 6:22pm) *
It's obvious that ArbComm is acting as a power center, the arbs, in many messages, discuss action to take that is entirely divorced from their function as the "court of last resort" on Wikipedia. They are, instead, serving as a star chamber, leaving behind the much more limited role as *arbitrators* in *disputes*. They are *initiating* action, being plaintiff, prosecutor, judge, and executioner all under one hat.
Did you really think that because they're called "abitrators," that they really are arbitrators or act as arbitrators?
Did you really think I'm stupid? My point is, indeed, that they do not arbitrate, they make decisions as an executive committee, deliberating mostly in secrecy, with only a limited posturing revealed.

No shit. They've never said otherwise. Although an outsider might be blamed for INFERRING that they talk to each other only "on record." Considering the long-windedness of their public writings.
Was that your point? Umm, we got that a long time ago.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kelly Martin
post Sat 2nd July 2011, 4:05am
Post #17


Bring back the guttersnipes!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 3,270
Joined: Sun 22nd Jun 2008, 4:41am
From: EN61bw
Member No.: 6,696



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 1st July 2011, 9:36pm) *

QUOTE(Abd @ Fri 1st July 2011, 7:08pm) *
My point is, indeed, that they do not arbitrate, they make decisions as an executive committee, deliberating mostly in secrecy, with only a limited posturing revealed.
No shit. They've never said otherwise. Although an outsider might be blamed for INFERRING that they talk to each other only "on record." Considering the long-windedness of their public writings.
Was that your point? Umm, we got that a long time ago.
The ArbCom consistently denies having any executive or legislative functions; it constantly insists that its only function is to resolve disputes. The rael executive committee are the so-called "functionaries", which is the ArbCom plus a handful of former Arbies like David Gerard, and of course Jimbo. Of course, membership in the functionaries is bestowed and revoked only by the functionaries; the community has no direct and fairly little indirect say.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 25th 10 14, 1:22pm