Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: SlimVirgin's Email to Me
Wikipedia Review > Wikimedia Discussion > Editors
Lir
I just got this in my email:

QUOTE

Dear Lir and Selina,

I'm writing to you in your capacity as administrators of Wikipedia
Review to request that you remove from your website all defamatory
material that has been published about me there, including in any
members-only area. I also request that you remove all references to
what some of your members believe is my real name.

The material I consider particularly injurious includes the
allegations that I am associated with neo-Nazis, and that I edit
Wikipedia in order to harm Jews, or on behalf of any outside agents. I
ask also that you remove the recent poll held to decide whether I am
Jewish, as well as the associated discussion comparing my actions to
Holocaust denial, and speculating as to whether the Mossad would
imprison or murder me.

I regard these allegations as very serious and very damaging, and
would therefore appreciate your cooperation.

I sent a request to Jeffrey Latham (Blu Aardvark) last week, and am
now following up to ensure that all three administrators of the site
have been formally requested to remove the material. I am cc-ing
Jeffrey Latham on this e-mail too.

Regards,

Sarah
(User:SlimVirgin)



I replied:

Honestly, my requests to Wikipedia, to remove false statements about myself, are routinely ignored -- look, Im not some overly moralistic do-gooder who always does the right thing, and loves his enemies regardless; so do you honestly think that I'm going to do anything? We already removed your personal name from the site -- that's way more than Wikipedia has done for me!

Your website banned me for vandalizing 198's user page, even though he himself testified I did not do so; it made up endless completely falsified lists of things that I did, such as vandalizing the clitoris page, or including 'vandalism' which BluAardvark himself admitted that he was guilty of -- it contacted my university, with yet more wholly false allegations; and now, it supports and publicizes Snowspinner's claim that I told the police about his livejournal, when the police specifically informed him that the person who did so lives in Germany. I know thus, because I called the damned police myself! Btw, nobody on WR is from Germany -- so we apparently had nothing to do with that incident, at all!

Talking shit is a two-way street hun, and you people at the WP aren't exactly innocent. So why should I lift a finger for you, who has not bothered to care about any of these sorts of issues, except now when things suddenly became embarrassing and inconvenient for yourself?

I personally know nothing about you, other than that a lot of people are sick of your haughty attitude; but I've been told that you edit articles on the Israeli-Palestine conflict, and if thats so, you might want to consider this WP vs WR issue to be rather similar... its a cycle of violence and personal attacks, but since you've already slandered us "trollerists", we've really got nothing to lose by fighting back. What are you going to do, slander us some more? Maybe you'll send some helicopter gunships and bomb a village of innocent little noobs, but that'll just bring more people to our message board.
Lir
She responded:

QUOTE

I have no final say over the content of Wikipedia. You do have a final
say over the content of Wikipedia Review. That is the legal
difference.

I've had nothing to do with any
of the problems you've had with Wikipedia, which I believe predate my
arrival. As you also know, I have no final say over content on
Wikipedia.

You are one of three administrators of Wikipedia Review, and you have
complete control over content. You are choosing to publish very
serious libels, material that you almost certainly know to be false.
One of your administrators is personally responsible for posting some
of it and has referred to me as an "evil cow." It therefore appears
that the material is being published maliciously.

The legal issues apart, it reflects very poorly on your site, and on
all the contributors and administrators. It is therefore in your own
interests to remove it, as well as in mine.


I replied:

You have just as much control over the content of Wikipedia, as I have over the message board; I can remove stuff, and unban people -- all of which you can do at your site. I do not know whether the serious "libel" is false or not; in fact, I haven't even read it -- I ignore posts about you, such topics are not of interest to me. In any case, if someone referred to you as an "old cow", that is unfortunate; but it pales in comparison to your website's unfounded accusations that I am a troll, and that I vandalized the clitoris articles.

Anyways, our users are quite fine with the content, and have raised no objections. You certainly aren't going to get me to do anything, by claiming that you have no control over the content at Wikipedia; because, we know that's not true, and I don't appreciate dishonesty.
Daniel Brandt
If that's not her real name, then maybe she doesn't live in Canada, but rather in the U.S. Oh-oh.

Lir's real name is easy to find, but SlimVirgin's is not. Therefore, SlimVirgin is not disclosing her identity while the same cannot be said of Lir.

"Whoever ... utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet ... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person ... who receives the communications ... shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Lir can accuse SlimVirgin of a felony. SlimVirgin can only claim that she is being libeled -- but how do you defame someone who is anonymous? Is that even possible? I'd say SlimVirgin should apologize for her email.
Lir
It is certainly absurd that she claims how I have absolute power to remove stuff here, yet she has no power on Wikipedia -- in fact, I have the same power here, that she has there! We are both admins!!! In any case, she has made no effort to address any of my complaints, or the complaints of others at this forum -- so aside from some attitude of saintly impulse, I see absolutely no reason to accomodate her at all. She can claim that she is just an innocent victim; but such claims don't impress Jimbo, and I guess it doesn't work for me either.

You have to admit, it makes for interesting game-theory.

QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 7th June 2006, 4:16pm) *
If that's not her real name

Im curious why you said that, someone just emailed me saying it isn't her real name as well; apparently, you people know something I don't.
EmperorMarcusAurelius
She responded:

QUOTE

I have no final say over the content of Wikipedia. You do have a final
say over the content of Wikipedia Review. That is the legal
difference.



oooo GG plausible deniability! Wikipaedia - 1

(See where communism gets you? Nobody is responsible for anything smile.gif)
jorge
QUOTE(EmperorMarcusAurelius @ Wed 7th June 2006, 11:04pm) *

She responded:

QUOTE

I have no final say over the content of Wikipedia. You do have a final
say over the content of Wikipedia Review. That is the legal
difference.



oooo GG plausible deniability! Wikipaedia - 1

(See where communism gets you? Nobody is responsible for anything smile.gif)

eh how can you libel a username?
Selina
She and her cronies have made personal attacks on me plenty times, seems she can dish it out but not take it rolleyes.gif
jorge
QUOTE(EmperorMarcusAurelius @ Wed 7th June 2006, 11:04pm) *


(See where communism gets you? Nobody is responsible for anything smile.gif)

strange that a user who stopped editing Wikipedia in July 2004 suddenly noticed this forum. laugh.gif
Lir
QUOTE(jorge @ Wed 7th June 2006, 5:20pm) *
strange that a user who stopped editing Wikipedia in July 2004 suddenly noticed this forum. laugh.gif

I told him about it.
guy
QUOTE(jorge @ Wed 7th June 2006, 11:07pm) *

eh how can you libel a username?

She hasn't mentioned libel. How could she? No legal threats! Anyway, she could scarcely bring a libel charge without revealing more about herself.
Jaranda
Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.
Lir
QUOTE(Jaranda @ Wed 7th June 2006, 5:28pm) *
Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.

She contacted me, not the other way around.
Selina
QUOTE(Jaranda @ Wed 7th June 2006, 10:28pm) *

Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.

she's been through NOTHING, all she did was kick up a big fuss by pretending to leave to get me banned. She's back and was never going to leave..
guy
QUOTE(Jaranda @ Wed 7th June 2006, 11:28pm) *

Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.

That's an utterly fatuous comment. I've seen what she did to at least one editor.
everyking
QUOTE(Jaranda @ Wed 7th June 2006, 10:28pm) *

Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.


It's easier to say that when she's never blocked you for no good reason, never tried to silence you through threats. For me at least, sympathy just tends to fail when I try to apply it to somebody who's done those things.
EmperorMarcusAurelius
QUOTE(jorge @ Wed 7th June 2006, 10:20pm) *

QUOTE(EmperorMarcusAurelius @ Wed 7th June 2006, 11:04pm) *


(See where communism gets you? Nobody is responsible for anything smile.gif)

strange that a user who stopped editing Wikipedia in July 2004 suddenly noticed this forum. laugh.gif


I'm ahead of the trends ain't I? OG Vandal! Seeing my userpage today sure was a glimpse into myself years ago though
Daniel Brandt
QUOTE
Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.

Jaranda, you should leave this forum alone before I get mad at you.

I sent you an email or two quite a few weeks ago, suggesting that you should stay away from my bio if you want to stay out of Hivemind. I couldn't even find out your last name, but did find out that you are a student at Miami Beach High School and your first name is Jorge. You seemed politely receptive to my emails, and even helpful.

The next thing I know, you throw around accusations that I tried to blackmail you (Jaranda = Aranda56 on IRC):

2006-05-29 11:44 < Aranda56> trust me I HATE Brandt
2006-05-29 11:44 < fuddleNotHere> bishonen: preferably a bit nicer next time.
2006-05-29 11:44 < fuddleNotHere> Grue`: fuck, yes
2006-05-29 11:44 * bishonen kills Grue`
2006-05-29 11:44 < Sceptre> Aranda: Who doesn't?
2006-05-29 11:44 < Aranda56> that Idiot tried to blackmail me
2006-05-29 11:44 < bishonen> fuddleNotHere: Slim has been attacked by so many trolls and bastards.
2006-05-29 11:44 < Sceptre> he did?
2006-05-29 11:45 < fuddleNotHere> bishonen: yes
2006-05-29 11:45 < bishonen> fuddleNotHere: imagiine being pursued by Rangerdude and FuilWagon.
2006-05-29 11:45 < Sceptre> You know, I'd call Brandt a fucktard, but that'd be an insult to fucktards around the world.
2006-05-29 11:45 < Sceptre> Pardon my language, please
2006-05-29 11:45 * bishonen howls like a wolf at the thought
2006-05-29 11:45 < maial> They can have Slim, really.
2006-05-29 11:45 < Aranda56> Brandt is a cuntfuck
Sgrayban
QUOTE(SlimVirgin's email)
I have no final say over the content of Wikipedia. You do have a final
say over the content of Wikipedia Review. That is the legal
difference.


Ohhhhhh deary.... you are so wrong.... Admin on WP claim to be representatives of WP all the time... Jimmy has given the admin the ability to remove and edit anything. You are accountable just like Jimmy is. Legally any admin can be sued right along with Jimmy when the admin know for a fact that something is libel and slander. Admin have often taken on email sent to the Foundation and answered it in the role of a representative.

Brad better start doing his fucking job there.

Ohhhh I called you a "old cow" and a [vulgar epithet used to refer to female genitalia] --- SUE ME !!!!!!!!! The minute you sue me I will then know who you are and were you live..... LOL think about that you stupid ass old cow....
Saltimbanco
I'm not a lawyer, but I do know a bit about libel laws. First, in order to be libelous, a statement has to be false. Second, in the US, it has to be made maliciously (a newspaper that reports in good faith something that turns out not to be true generally is not subject to libel penalties). Third, even when libel has occured, it is a tort and not a crime: it must also be proven that the libel caused damages before any penalty applies. The third matter is kind of difficult to demonstrate when one is hiding behind anonymity, and the first allows a lot of latitude: "SlimVirgin is an asshole" is normally understood to be an expression of an opinion; you would have to make a more substantial claim, such as, "SlimVirgin beats her dog," in order for it potentially to be libelous.

I wouldn't lose sleep over it.



QUOTE(Jaranda @ Wed 7th June 2006, 6:28pm) *

Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.


Her life would probably be a lot less stressful if she weren't such an asshole. When she decides to give up being such an asshole, that will be when she's been through enough.
antbear
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 7th June 2006, 9:16pm) *

If that's not her real name, then maybe she doesn't live in Canada, but rather in the U.S. Oh-oh.

Oh, I thought she was American.

QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 7th June 2006, 9:16pm) *

Lir's real name is easy to find, but SlimVirgin's is not. Therefore, SlimVirgin is not disclosing her identity while the same cannot be said of Lir.

"Whoever ... utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet ... without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person ... who receives the communications ... shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Lir can accuse SlimVirgin of a felony. SlimVirgin can only claim that she is being libeled -- but how do you defame someone who is anonymous? Is that even possible? I'd say SlimVirgin should apologize for her email.

That looks serious. Are you saying that anyone here who doesn't use their real name could be fined or imprisoned for annoying, abusing, harassing SlimVirgin? That's pretty hard to believe - I'd like to see some case law on that.
Locke85
The irony is that we assume good faith when they can't despite the fact here we recognize it as common sense but on Wikipedia it's policy... though one that's paid lip service.
Sgrayban
QUOTE(antbear @ Wed 7th June 2006, 6:20pm) *

That looks serious. Are you saying that anyone here who doesn't use their real name could be fined or imprisoned for annoying, abusing, harassing SlimVirgin? That's pretty hard to believe - I'd like to see some case law on that.


I would read the law more often before perfecting the "FOOT IN MOUTH" syndrome.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.3402:
In particular -> SEC. 113. PREVENTING CYBERSTALKING and explained at
http://news.com.com/FAQ+The+new+annoy+law+..._3-6025396.html

The section as amended reads like this:
QUOTE

“Whoever…utilizes any device or software that can be used to originate telecommunications or other types of communications that are transmitted, in whole or in part, by the Internet… without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person…who receives the communications…shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”


And since I have more then once disclosed who I was I am not obligated under this law. Nor can I be arrested under this new clause.
antbear
QUOTE(Hushthis @ Thu 8th June 2006, 1:33am) *


(Sorry Ant, I mangled your post with the new buttons they gave me. I think I caught it in time and fixed it.)
QUOTE(antbear @ Thu 8th June 2006, 1:20am) *


That looks serious. Are you saying that anyone here who doesn't use their real name could be fined or imprisoned for annoying, abusing, harassing SlimVirgin? That's pretty hard to believe - I'd like to see some case law on that.



There is still protected speech. Literary criticism is usually very well protected.


Whew! And Wikipedia Review is for literary criticism, so anything we say here about anyone is exactly that, literary criticism. smile.gif

QUOTE(sgrayban @ Thu 8th June 2006, 1:38am) *

QUOTE(antbear @ Wed 7th June 2006, 6:20pm) *

That looks serious. Are you saying that anyone here who doesn't use their real name could be fined or imprisoned for annoying, abusing, harassing SlimVirgin? That's pretty hard to believe - I'd like to see some case law on that.


I would read the law more often before perfecting the "FOOT IN MOUTH" syndrome.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.3402:
In particular -> SEC. 113. PREVENTING CYBERSTALKING and explained at
http://news.com.com/FAQ+The+new+annoy+law+..._3-6025396.html


But I didn't see any specific cases mentioned there. Maybe I missed something - has someone been charged with this, or taken to court over it? Anyway, Hushthis has pointed out that Brandt is wrong on this, in the Wikipedia Review forum we just do literary criticism, so it doesn't apply here.
blissyu2
As I understand it, there are 3 criteria for libel:

1) It must be false, and knowingly false. If someone points out that it is false, and they remove it or make a retraction, it cannot be libel.
2) It must be damaging with an actual monetary figure associated to it. If it doesn't cost you any money then it's not libel.
3) It must uniquely identify you so that a random third person could know that it was really you that they were talking about.

In the case of Slim Virgin, let's consider these 3 issues:

1) It is not knowingly false. There has been speculation and assertions, and indeed some of it may have been false. Whilst Slim Virgin has e-mailed us to take it down, she has neither stated which posts nor has she said what is false about it, therefore it fails rule 1.
2) There is no monetary damage here. Losing face as a Wikipedia editor, even if she got desysopped or even banned because of it is not enough for libel. She isn't losing her job over this, or becoming unemployable.
3) We aren't uniquely identifying her as a part of this. While she remains anonymous, it can't be libel. Of course, if she were to say her real name, then that's another matter entirely.

If she came out, and said to us "Hi, My name is L**** G****. I live in Alberta, Canada. I represent a pro-Israeli and pro-Judaism position and I believe that what you are saying about me is false, and could harm my position as editor of the Jew & Israeli quarterly" then boom, we'd be forced to take it down.

And if she said that, or something like that, we would take it down.

But right now it is so far removed from being libel as to be laughable.

So here I am laughing. HA HA HA HA HA!

Something tells me that whoever is advising Slim Virgin on law needs to be fired.
Ryan Norton
QUOTE(Daniel Brandt @ Wed 7th June 2006, 4:34pm) *

The next thing I know, you throw around accusations that I tried to blackmail you (Jaranda = Aranda56 on IRC):


What's with people calling each other "cuntfuck"s anyway (I could understand if it was just joking...)? It sounds like they had too much of the wikipedia-coolaid :\. Aranda56 (or Jaranda) seemed pretty nice to me, anyway.

SlimVirgin's letter is rather intimidating too (and with the legal word in minimal context, too) - and to Lir - heh. I wonder why WPdians keep sending Lir emails - based on past experience logic seems to hint that all he will do is post it here, and then the WPdian in question will likely get their pants flamed off...
Sgrayban
QUOTE
SlimVirgin's letter is rather intimidating too (and with the legal word in minimal context, too) - and to Lir - heh. I wonder why WPdians keep sending Lir emails - based on past experience logic seems to hint that all he will do is post it here, and then the WPdian in question will likely get their pants flamed off...


So true..... But we are talking about the common sense of WikiPEEdoians here......
Nathan
It's nice for her to basically scream zOMG THEY'RE ATTACKING ME, IT'S LIBEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111 when they do the same thing to us.

What makes her so special that WR has to bow down to her demands? They insult us plenty of times. I get called names just because I use WR. I get questioned because I know some people here. What's her point?

As it's been said before, as soon as she files anything, we know more about her - her name, her address, you can't anonomise that in any court. Can we say: "Shooting yourself in the foot"? That information will be out there, whether she wants it to be or not.

- Nathan
Ashibaka
There are probably people who are angry enough at SlimVirgin that if her address were posted they would literally go out and stalk her. That's what the mask of anonymity is for on a virulent Internet forum.
Nathan
Point goes to Ashibaka.

On that note, I'm glad the only address I give out is a Post Office box address. People can stalk that all they like, I'm not the one who checks it . tongue.gif

- Nathan
Skyring
QUOTE(Nathan @ Tue 13th June 2006, 4:13am) *
On that note, I'm glad the only address I give out is a Post Office box address. People can stalk that all they like, I'm not the one that checks it . tongue.gif
Crikey! Are you the 'Nathan in Ottawa I think you are?
Nathan
QUOTE(Skyring @ Mon 12th June 2006, 2:19pm) *

Crikey! Are you the 'Nathan in Ottawa I think you are?


SHIT I've been found out! *starts running really fast*

- Nathan
Skyring
QUOTE(Ashibaka @ Mon 12th June 2006, 4:25am) *
There are probably people who are angry enough at SlimVirgin that if her address were posted they would literally go out and stalk her. That's what the mask of anonymity is for on a virulent Internet forum.
Don't kid yourself. There's enough information around that he or she could be identified and found by anyone determined enough. Stage one is to look for similarities in handles, email addresses and so on. Then on to text analysis - everyone has little stylistic quirks and the "anal" part of the analysis comes from sifting through enough text to pick them up and then hunt them down elsewhere. Identity theft is a third string - if you know a little bit about someone you can parlay that into a lot by approaching official or semi-official sources and pretending you've lost your password/changed your address/married etc. There's lotsa ways to find out stuff - credit registries, tenant checks, publicly accessible records, and thousands of folk on the internet who make good livings doing this.

You can make it hard for someone to find you, but if someone is clever enough and determined enough and has time enough - which covers a lot of internet cranks - they'll find you.

As I say, I speak from experience. Look at this diff and those following. The entries showing my full name and address have been removed, but it is pretty clear where they were, looking at the edit summaries from other editors. This particular admin had hunted up a letter to the editor I'd written in another country, and decided that this was me, and all of Wikipedia should see it. he even protected his talk page to stop me (or any other non-admin) from removing it.
Skyring
QUOTE(Nathan @ Tue 13th June 2006, 4:23am) *

QUOTE(Skyring @ Mon 12th June 2006, 2:19pm) *

Crikey! Are you the 'Nathan in Ottawa I think you are?
SHIT I've been found out! *starts running really fast*
Nope, different guy, apparently. Here's my 'Nathan - a really sweet bloke. Obviously there is more than one Nathan in Ottawa. Who'd a thunk it? So don't worry, your secret identity is safe with me!
Nathan
QUOTE(Skyring @ Mon 12th June 2006, 2:59pm) *

Here's my 'Nathan - a really sweet bloke. Obviously there is more than one Nathan in Ottawa. Who'd a thunk it? So don't worry, your secret identity is safe with me!


Aww. :| I'm that guy.

- Nathan
Skyring
QUOTE(Nathan @ Tue 13th June 2006, 5:30am) *
Aww. :| I'm that guy
Equally sweet, I'm sure!
Ashibaka
QUOTE(Skyring @ Mon 12th June 2006, 6:48pm) *
Don't kid yourself. There's enough information around that he or she could be identified and found by anyone determined enough.
Yes, and even the most anonymous editor can be tricked into clicking a link to reveal their IP address. My point is that organizing such details on this site makes the job really easy for someone who may have otherwise just calmed down and given up on it.

This isn't a "WP:BEANS" or "helping the terrorists" cop-out-- personal information isn't like explaining how an angry person could break a lock, it's like posting the combination to the lock. In SlimVirgin's case, if what Brandt has found out about changing her legal name is true, there might be a real possibility of danger here by revealing that; it could go beyond Wikipedia.

Maybe both Brandt and Wikipedia need to recognize that the Internet is blurring the line between a private and public figure, and we should err on the side of privacy.
Skyring
QUOTE(Ashibaka @ Tue 13th June 2006, 6:41am) *
QUOTE(Skyring @ Mon 12th June 2006, 6:48pm) *
Don't kid yourself. There's enough information around that he or she could be identified and found by anyone determined enough.
Yes, and even the most anonymous editor can be tricked into clicking a link to reveal their IP address. My point is that organizing such details on this site makes the job really easy for someone who may have otherwise just calmed down and given up on it.

This isn't a "WP:BEANS" or "helping the terrorists" cop-out-- personal information isn't like explaining how an angry person could break a lock, it's like posting the combination to the lock. In SlimVirgin's case, if what Brandt has found out about changing her legal name is true, there might be a real possibility of danger here by revealing that; it could go beyond Wikipedia.

Maybe both Brandt and Wikipedia need to recognize that the Internet is blurring the line between a private and public figure, and we should err on the side of privacy.
I like the "combination" analogy and accept your point. The availability of computerised databases has made information that was once public but difficult to find (such as drink driving convictions or land sales) now easily searchable, and this brings up subtle questions of privacy.

However, I don't think that there is a solution to this problem. If WP cannot identify contributors, then WP is going to have to take responsibility for anonymous contributions in the case of libel or copyright issues. One day, and I'd say it would be sooner rather than later, someone is going to get upset about something appearing in a WP article, and they are going to look at the significant assets of WP and go for it.

I'd say that the days of the anon editor are numbered.
Ashibaka
QUOTE(Skyring @ Mon 12th June 2006, 10:24pm) *

I'd say that the days of the anon editor are numbered.

And you may well be right. The Internet is still a wild and anarchic place, legally speaking, and at some point in the near future there might be an incident which makes it necessary for editors to supply their personal info.

For now, though, I would advocate hiding the SlimVirgin thread. She made a polite request, the information might be harmful to her, and there's no point to unmasking her besides "revenge" or demonstrating that it can be done. If I were SV I would use my magical cabal powers to get Jimbo to make a decent privacy policy for Wikipedia biographies, but alas we can only be polite on the Wikipedia Review side right now.
danielshays
QUOTE

Dear Lir and Selina,

I'm writing to you in your capacity as administrators of Wikipedia
Review to request that you remove from your website all defamatory
material that has been published about me there, including in any
members-only area. I also request that you remove all references to
what some of your members believe is my real name.

The material I consider particularly injurious includes the
allegations that I am associated with neo-Nazis, and that I edit
Wikipedia in order to harm Jews, or on behalf of any outside agents. I
ask also that you remove the recent poll held to decide whether I am
Jewish, as well as the associated discussion comparing my actions to
Holocaust denial, and speculating as to whether the Mossad would
imprison or murder me.

I regard these allegations as very serious and very damaging, and
would therefore appreciate your cooperation.

I sent a request to Jeffrey Latham (Blu Aardvark) last week, and am
now following up to ensure that all three administrators of the site
have been formally requested to remove the material. I am cc-ing
Jeffrey Latham on this e-mail too.

Regards,

Sarah
(User:SlimVirgin)


SlimVirgin..Poor baby. You gots to be kidding. After all the injury you have done to so many, with absolutely no thought to changing your ways, with no apparant guilt for what you do to hurt people, with your obvious complicity with the machine of censorship on Wikipedia.. You have the bald ass nerve to ask this site to remove information about you. Now that I see you are asking to remove info about from WR, I will be sure to make a special section about you on http://earthhopenetwork.net/

And because my disgust with you is also real personal see:
Your harassment of me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:The...star#Your_edits
Your huge involvement in getting me blocked indefinitely from editing as thewolfstar at Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...ty.27s_patience
I will be sure to make it a real thorough and detailed discussion of what an absolutely evil person you are.

As a footnore NotSoSlimSurgeon er I mean GrimGeurkin uh, wait.. SlimAsshole.<br>Oh I give up, whatever your name is.

FUCK YOU wink.gif

QUOTE(Jaranda @ Wed 7th June 2006, 6:28pm) *

Some of u guys should leave her alone, she's been though enough.


I don't know who you are, Jatanda, but going on this. 'leave her alone, she's been through enough'

Not only fuck SlimEvil, but fuck you, too.
Nathan
WP needs to be turned even further upside down than it has been already but that's just my opinion.

- Nathan (I'm always tempted to type "~~~~" for some reason)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.