Just about the best thing one can say about David Shankbone is that he isn't the worst kind of person. There are criminals and non-criminal sociopaths out there who rank lower. But for a certain kind of maliciousness, he's one of the best examples around. He's sleazy. Not just sleazy, but maybe the sleaziest Wikipedian out there.

I'm not just saying that to knock him -- although I'm certainly knocking him, too. In politics there's a certain kind of bad actor who stands up in moral outrage and at the same time does something outrageous, justifying it with a kind of (im)moral sleight-of-hand. Nixon was sleazy. Clinton was sleazy (both of them are). A lot of political operators are sleazy (Roger Stone, Anthony Podesta, James Carville, most of the Nixon White House). I don't think it's a coincidence that "sleaze" is a word mostly heard in relation to politics or sexuality, where we value sincerity and restraint. To a degree, it's used when people complain about businesses, but less so, because we expect business people, ultimately, to act on their own behalf.

Shankbone is an artist at simultaneously lecturing others on their responsibilities while not meeting his own. He's also a sleaze artist in another sense, posting his porn-like pics on Wikipedia. I was scrolling down OpenWickiBlogPlanet when I came across this post about a TV anchor who had the misfortune of meeting Shankbone. Sex + Politics x Shankbone = David's Latest Atrocity

What a bucket of sleaze.

One of the interesting things about Shankbone is that he simultaneously is very sensitive to his own hurts on the surface -- ever ready to make a complaint and express his hurt feelings -- and yet when you look at how he treats others, it's with a contempt that, frankly, I find chilling (I'm not exaggerating). I don't get the sense that he really treats people badly because he's angry or offended by them but because he can and because he can call attention to himself. And he'll hide behind some supposed principle to get away with it. If he did it with some kind of panache, we could at least call him a "rascal", but he doesn't even add that to it. He's just sleazy.

He's not a nice person but at least he doesn't directly subject and target numerous individuals with his intrusive unwelcome sexual sleaziness behind the scenes on a personal and real level, in numerous ways.

Christ, not this again.

Just a bucket? I thought we'd decided it was more like one of those big fuel-storage tanks they have at oil refineries.




I'm not so sure I'd call that "interesting" in itself, Mr. Noroton - that's just classic NPD behavior. You weren't here (on WR) when it all went down, but it was just so obvious that I think we all felt justified in playing "Internet Psychiatrist," stating flat-out that he's a serious NPD case... I know I did, anyway. Contrast that with someone like Phil Sandifer, who probably has NPD but is at least able to hide the more blatant aspects enough that one grudgingly has to think twice before proclaiming it.

What's far more interesting to me is the degree to which Wikipedia is forced to just bend over and take it - he knew exactly how to set himself up (i.e., take loads of free photos for a site/community that desperately needs free photos) so that anyone challenging him could be made to feel guilty for "harassing" such a "useful contributor." And so he remains, and probably will remain for the foreseeable future.

Got that right. Kind of reminds me how that chemical industrial site in New Jersey, just outside New York City, stands for the whole state in the popular imagination. Shankbone's porn-like uploads are a similar blot on Wikipedia, although they fit in well with some of the prose already there.


Well, it's interesting to me. Even on Wikipedia, I haven't noticed the Shankbone kind of mewling combined with the Shankbone kind of ruthlessness, although I suppose you veteran Wikipedia watchers might come up with examples. I did read WR before joining here, although I must've missed that discussion, but I concur with your diagnosis, Dr. Somey. The Mayo Clinic, might be describing the patient here:

Maybe we can get some of the lawyers here to draw up the commitment papers -- hey, NewYorkBrad's in the same city!

No, I think even as an NPD sufferer, he stands out as one talented creator of drama, combining transgressiveart , performance art and protest art in one gooey, slimey, sleazy, stinkin' mess of an ongoing circus. Nobody in show business works harder than this guy, at least not on Wikipedia. He's quite talented in a number of ways, and seems pretty intelligent (I've even used some of his photos). I think we need to recognize this as not just another head case. [Edited to add: Now that I look back to my first post, I see I'm completely contradicting what I said about him not having panache. Well, I'm revising my opinion.] But there's something missing from "have little regard for other people's feelings". When he's on a tear, I don't think he's regarding other human beings at all. I can recall my jaw dropping as I read some of his comments in some past Wikipedia fights. He goes after people, not just editor pseudonyms but named people that he can hurt, as if he's on the hunt. I have to admit that when the shit storms are over, he's been known to display some regrets.


Thanks so much for that image. At least you didn't provide a photo with it (one of Shankbone's probably exists on Commons). No, really. Don't look one up for me.

Yes, make yourself useful enough and the normal rules don't apply. Raul24/7 should put that axiom up on that page of his.

With all the reruns of it, it feels like Valerie Bertinelli in a damn Lifetime movie.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW!

Okay.

Make no mistake, he's NPD and sleazy. Erratic too.


What do you mean? On Wikipedia, it's all about the buttholes.

Most of it was tar-pitted, actually. Non-members won't be able to read the linked material (including Eric's "sleazy" link above), but here's where most of it is, anyway:

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17113
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17957
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=17989

...The first of those being the thread in which he introduced himself. I'd like to think most of us tried to accomodate his "special needs" at the outset, and I still don't personally think there's anything especially wrong with using image uploads and interviews with minor celebrities to get noticed and gain stature on WP, and ultimately promote oneself elsewhere... particularly if one isn't an administrator.

If only he had kept it at that!

Clearly, I've got a lot of reading to catch up on. I had no idea there was this much. Thanks, Somey & Eric.

And, frankly, his photographs aren't all that special.

They're especially sleazy.

FYI - tomorrow is Mr. Miller's birthday. Any ideas for a birthday present?

One of those fancy x-ray cameras would probably save him a lot of time and effort, currently being wasted in getting people to take their pants off.

Might I be the first to wish Mr. Miller a happy birthday?

Is this productive in any fashion?

Well, you have a choice...you can talk to Horsey or you can watch this video:





The choice..

....is...

yours!

My statement and how true it really is

probably more productive than Shankly's porn portfolio on Wikipedia, eh Brad?

I can't stomach his "art". Sleazeville.