A bit late considering someone already saw it and
threatened to cut my fingers off. And at this point,
I'm talking to people who have oversight, even if
it is rather late.

That's very considerate of you. Here's an OTRS from me that is still waiting for a reply. It's only been 2.5 months, so I don't mean to rush you.

OTRS ticket number: 2007121310001984.

Brion Vibber and Erik Moeller know about it, and have done nothing.

OK, well, just thought I'd offer.

I'm fairly sure I wasn't talking to you, but I looked at the ticket and I don't think OTRS is the right vehicle to resolve that matter. I will have no further comment on it.

Well, why not tell Daniel who you think he should talk to?

jimbo.wales: I wrote an email to the internal editors list about your entry recommending some changes, etc. I said that I would run it by you for clarification/comment and email again if there were any updates I think we have two major problems right now first, the timeline is wrong about the recent cop case... that is the worst error and easy to fix

me: what's that?
plus, they also say he was "cleared". not true.

jimbo.wales: second we exactly and correctly sigh follow the bias of the press
right, so I complained about this
for you, they decided not to pursue charges, for him, he was exonerated... this is bullshit and the truth is the exact opposite

jimbo.wales: right so the way it is told now, hang on a second
let's actually do this right no
because the last thing I want to do is take a break from fucking your brains out all night to work on your wikipedia entry

jimbo.wales: "In September 2007, on her blog Marsden wrote about and posted a picture of a counterterrorism officer for the Ontario Provincial Police with whom she had an affair. She claimed that he had leaked secret anti-terrorism documents to her, then posted email messages from him as evidence that he had been pursuing her,[13] and sent to the National Post these along with sexually explicit pictures of him that she had received.[5] She was investigated for criminal harassment for this behaviour,[14] but was not charged.[15][16] The OPP's criminal investigations branch cleared the officer of any wrongdoing.[15][16]"
so our timeline is wrong
we say
(1) wrote about him on your blog
(2) posted email messages from him
(3) as a result he files harassment charges

me: exactly. it was a retaliatory complaint on his part that was launched 2 months after they initiated their investigation into his stuff.

jimbo.wales: but the correct timeline is
(1) wrote about him on the blog

me: hahhahaha

jimbo.wales: (2) he files harassment charges
(3) you post email messages to show how his harassment charges are bullshit

me: you're a sh*tdisturber.
right
I only posted the emails after he went public trtying to create trouble.
NOT before that.

jimbo.wales: nod
so we can get that sorted
and then this makes the story clearer

me: that's good of you to do. really.

jimbo.wales: ok so then the other thing is...
in my email I said, here are some thoughts about this, things that need fixing
and i may follow up if there are clarifications from her
but then I said I am recusing myself from it other than that
i explained that we became friends in IM and that I offered to give advice about your website and that we would be meeting about that

me: ahhhh so you qualified it, and left it "up to them".

jimbo.wales: and therefore not appropriate for me to directly edit the article with a conflict of interest

me: which usually, actually, works better than the alternative

jimbo.wales: the truth is of course a much worse conflict of interest than that but that will do

me: aaaaaaaaahahaha. lol

jimbo.wales: well this is an internal mailing list of people who specialize in fixing this kind of stuff, so you are in good hands

me: awwww thank you.
how many people are on the list?

jimbo.wales: oh, huh
I have no idea.

me: hahaha so you told them the half-truth.

jimbo.wales: depends on what the meaning of "is" is

me: ahahahahahha

I've set myself certain engagement rules, which I suppose I should put in my signature the way Sarcastic Idealist did. (meanwhile, you could read something that hints at them here) But in any case I'm not competent (in the legal sense) to speak to the matter that ticket raises and I prefer not to put myself in the position of having given him any advice, position, information, etc. on it for a number of different reasons. So as I said, I'll have no further comment. (that in itself was a big long no comment for those playing along at home)

A bit late considering someone already saw it and threatened to cut my fingers off. And at this point, I'm talking to people who have oversight, even if it is rather late.

So just pass Daniel up to whatever the
OTRS equivalent of a manager is, and
let that person either comment or pass
Daniel further up the chain.

That's Law Enforcement concern, nevermind oversight. Get complaining straight away, maybe they'll round up Wales for enabling.

AF

<snip>

Yeah, well, I asked an OTRS member to blank something that outed me, then an arbitrator publicly attacked me for doing so…

Which arbitrator?

It's a bit humorous that I'm being accused of "poking people for my own amusement" and told to "grow up" in a thread where a whole bunch of people are snickering back and forth about Jimbo's ex-girlfriend and how she's selling his stuff on Ebay.... but whatever....

Wow. He's not kidding when he says that BLP's should be handled in a loving manner.

Obviously you have to do more than fuck somebody to get a decent Wikipedia entry.

No further comment on what is or isn't being done with that ticket. Sorry.

Lar, are you really a checkuser? Have you noticed the rash of WP:DUCK permablocks that have been happening lately, without (or even in spite of) Checkuser results? Does anyone in the leadership at Wikipedia really realize how many innocent people get permablocked as sockpuppets?

I am really a checkuser, yes. You can examine my WikiMatrix to see where, if you wish. I know that Checkuser is imperfect and that sometimes other means need to be employed. No system of checks, no mechanism of investigation, nothing organized by humans, can ever be perfect.

I hope that helps answer your question.

I would note that right now, a fairly significant arbcom case is turning at least in part on what weight DUCK evidence provided and evaluated by the community should be given.

This is ABSURD. The page has now been protected. The information was moved to the Marsden article, where it was promptly removed. Thus, the information now exists nowhere, despite the fact that NOBODY HAS EVEN CLAIMED IT SHOULDN'T BE IN WIKIPEDIA.

At times like this, the only thing you can say is,
TRULY EPIC LULZ

Seriously though, I think those chat logs are fabricated. They're just too perfect. Jimbo paranoid about the Google guys eavesdropping? Joking about how he doesn't want to take time out from sex to edit her Wikipedia article? As much as I'd love to believe Jimbo is that crazy, it's too much. She is, after all, a psycho hose beast of the first order.

Moderator note: I absent-mindedly posted something here and deleted it as a retraction, as well as its reply by Amarkov (for no other reason other than because a response to a deleted post would make no sense).

This epic saga has hit the UPI now so double the chances it will hit the NYT.

I'm getting impatient!

I think Erik Moeller is right. I'm tired of these tabloids like the New York Times, Washington Post, Times of London and Daily Telegraph (yes, the Wales story is there too) muckraking like this.

Did you take a look at http://antisocialmedia.net/?p=125 ? The very changes discussed in the chatlog were later made by other admins, which is fishy indeed. So if the deal wasn't done in this way, it's a very fancy bit of embroidery by a woman scorned.

It occurs to me that Jimbo's language in his supposed chats can be subjected to sock analysis in just the way we've long done it. For example, he chat-writes: "Nodding". Is that a characteristic of Jimbo agreeing to something in chat-mode? Inquiring minds want to know. And there are a bunch of other little quirks that should be identifiable.

-- Milt

The NY Times has the AP story
Wikipedia's Wales Hits Over Expenses

I think Erik Moeller is right. I'm tired of these tabloids like the New York Times, Washington Post, Times of London and Daily Telegraph (yes, the Wales story is there too) muckraking like this.

I hope no one reverts me here because this is very pertinent to Wikipedia's current affairs, and I'm posting as I want this to be widely read,both inside and outside Wikipedia. I think I am the person with the Wiki-knowledge and standing to say this. I have been asked by the press for my views, so I thought it would be honest, and correct, to publish them here.

Over the last few days like many others I have smiled at J Wales discomfort, and as you all know I don't have a huge amount of respect for him, so bearing that in mind, I hope you will all take to heart what I'm about to say, I have read all the gossip both the titilatious and libellous - and my opinion: There is no story. I first heard the rumours concerning his marriage and finances before Christmas, and the fact I dismissed them should tell you all something. I also have heard that many close to him would like to stick a knife in his back, so perhaps that should be born in mind too. An awful lot of emails do seem to go astray don't they? In fact, I have never seen such a badly organized, ham fisted and amateur assassination attempt in my life, and I've seen a few. Let's look at the facts:

He's been caught with his trousers down looking stupid, if that was an impeachable and serious offence the world would be devoid of half its leaders. In my opinion it's a huge pity she is not selling all his clothes, he's a scruffy looking bastard, and the prestige of Wikipedia would be improved if he invested in a couple of Italian suits, and you see, it is the prestige of Wikipedia that brings me to the details of the expense account - again no impeachable story. For the benefit of those who don't have huge expense accounts let me spell out a few unsavoury truths.

When on company business, if your expenditure improves (in your opinion) the prestige and value of the company - you can spend what you like, if your dining with an important client you give him Montrachet to drink not Australian, or Californian, chardonnay. Similarly, if on tour and you have back pain, one can justify a massage on company expenses to keep the tour going. It matters not, that some of us may think he could have been more frugal, and that massage has connotations, if he says the expenses were justified that is the end of the story. You can spend what you like, so long as you believe that expenditure will benefit in some way the company. That is all he has to say - and he will say that. He has not been caught with his fingers in the cash box.

There is not an Chief Executive alive, of any major company, who has not been berated by the Finance Secretary for losing receipts, when you are busy you shove them in pockets, then the suit (or those scruffy jeans) goes to the dry cleaners etc. etc. etc. - you get out of a taxi in a hurry and don't even pick the receipt up - for some daft reason I store them in hotel ash trays and then the chambermaid throws them away... this whole business is ludicrous.

Has he influenced the content of the Marsden page, in my opinion, yes, he probably has. However, I don't see any concrete evidence of it. and even if he has, it is not a serious enough crime for the torrents of abuse and publicity he is receiving - a warning from the Arbcom on his page is sufficient if that is ever proved.

I have not read or heard of one word, that would stand up in any court against him. If people want to get rid of Jimbo, they are going to have to find something more concrete than this - being a very poor judge of character is all he is guilty of, and that is not enough. The many millions of words written on this subject amount to nothing. Those that seek to be rid of him, have overplayed their cards - they did not even have enough points for an opening bid.

He may feel he has to resign over this, if he does not, and in my view, he need not, and people still want to be rid of J Wales, or curb his powers, it has to be done in an open, honest and frank way. The current state of affairs demeans the whole encyclopedia. Giano (talk) 14:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Giano has no sense whatsoever of what the word "nonprofit" means. Sure, some execs of fat foundations make fat salaries. Some university presidents get paid way too much. But when they get caught with their pants down, they're out the door. Go quietly or not — that's the only choice they have.

Also, Giano speaks as a European. Things are different on that side of the pond. Until recently, many European countries allowed bribes as tax writeoffs. NOT kidding.

I stopped reading when I read "There is no story".

For chrissake Giano. A thousand newspaper editors seem to disagree.

Giano's British isn't he? What are you talking about?

He's talking utter nonsense. And another thing, how would "the press ask him for his views"? No one knows who he is?

It seems to me that this scandal has the level of press coverage to warrant an article of its own.

"Old World"? I've lived in the "Old World" for many decades. In contrast to the US, the press chases stories on the sex lives of leaders and mocks the US media for its deferential attitude to the rich and powerful. In Europe people get chased down underpasses by paparazzi (named after Fellini's celebrity chaser in La Dolce Vita) on motorbikes. It's so aggressive people get killed over stories.

Hello! Or should I say Hola? In Spain and Italy, all people do is talk about the sex lives of the rich and famous. In the UK, it can bring down a government, and famously did in 1963.

"Old World"? I've lived in the "Old World" for many decades. In contrast to the US, the press chases stories on the sex lives of leaders and mocks the US media for its deferential attitude to the rich and powerful. In Europe people get chased down underpasses by paparazzi (named after Fellini's celebrity chaser in La Dolce Vita) on motorbikes. It's so aggressive people get killed over stories.

Hello! Or should I say Hola? In Spain and Italy, all people do is talk about the sex lives of the rich and famous. In the UK, it can bring down a government, and famously did in 1963.

He has to go because he can't be trusted not to intervene, or to get others to do so for him in biographies of people with whom he is connected.

[Marsden] published transcripts of messages in which Wales explained how he would lean on a committee to fix her Wikipedia entry to her liking.

Methinks she does protest too much, and can't see that there was any relationship to bother over.

The whole, "I've never met you properly before but I am looking forward to my 24 hours of fun,

...

It's also called "hitting on a famous person". I'm sure old Jimmy gets lots of those.

It boggles the mind, but he probably does.

Ewww.

Talk about the worst woman to dump cruelly, and publicly if you don't want bad press. Wow.

I'm surprised that she had the good humor she did, to use Ebay. Most women would have gone to Walmart and gone gun shopping.

Then again, the married with kids Mark Oaten was challenging for the leadership of the Lib Dem Party when it emerged he regularly paid rent boys to shit on him.

Then again, it didn't emerge (due to use of D-notices) that Tony Blair's daughter tried to commit suicide a few years back when she was being bullied about her dad's foreign policy!

Didn't Keith Olbermann name Marsden the "Worst Person in the World" one day?

I'm not sure if she made the worst person list, but Olbermann did do a story about her "colorful past" after she tried to argue the Duke lacrosse players weren't harmed by the false rape charges.