From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 10:00:33 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
Message-ID: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
I'm a little worried about 71.139.2.170
</wiki/Special:Contributions/71.139.2.170> who's been arguing rather
vehemently on Wikipedia talk:Child protection from an IP with no other
history and sniffed around CU thinking we might find one of our usual
trolls.
Out pops User:Ixfd64, a low profile admin, who seems to be the only user
of a specific version of Safari on a Mac in the entire /20 which is
shared by our IP friend, along with Tastes bad actually
</w/index.php?title=User:Tastes_bad_actually&action=edit&redlink=1>
(single contrib account), and they all seem to have upgraded their MacOS
at the same time. (Ixfd64 also contributes from the same IP with Safari
on a Mac, Huggle and Firefox on Windows - I'd guess laptop). In all
cases, had this been an SPI I would have tagged {{confirmed}} without
hesitation.
I don't see anything *especially* fishy about Ixfd64's contributions;
and this might be a case of fear of witch hunt -- especially since the
IP is arguing the less political position that "We don't ban victims
because there are predators on Wikipedia". This, of course, is
especially ironic since that checkuser I did might very well be a little
witchhunty.
Nevertheless, having an admin edit a policy discussion while logged off
sits very badly with me. What should I do next? I was thinking a quiet
email to the admin directly stating that things look bad, and that if
he's the one on the talk page editing while logged off he should cut it
out now?
-- Coren / Marc
----------
From shell.kinney at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 14:15:40 2010
From: shell.kinney at gmail.com (Michelle Kinney)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:15:40 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
Is he double-dipping or just contributing to the discussion logged out
to avoid associating his viewpoint with his account? If it's the
former, it needs more than a quiet email, but the latter - well, I can
understand being concerned about your privacy over this issue.
Shell Kinney
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Tue Jul 6 14:19:05 2010
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 10:19:05 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the
pedo kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
On 06/07/2010 10:15 AM, Michelle Kinney wrote:
> Is he double-dipping or just contributing to the discussion logged out
> to avoid associating his viewpoint with his account? If it's the
> former, it needs more than a quiet email, but the latter - well, I can
> understand being concerned about your privacy over this issue.
>
No double dips, hence my original thought of the quiet email. I'm still
not comfortable about an admin participating in /policy discussion/
while logged out, but I know some of us are a bit more lenient regarding
multiple accounts so I brought it here first. This is probably a case
of "if you can't do it right, then you shouldn't be doing it at all" IMO.
-- Coren / Marc
-----------
From shell.kinney at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 14:29:08 2010
From: shell.kinney at gmail.com (Michelle Kinney)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:29:08 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
>
> No double dips, hence my original thought of the quiet email. ?I'm still
> not comfortable about an admin participating in /policy discussion/
> while logged out, but I know some of us are a bit more lenient regarding
> multiple accounts so I brought it here first. ?This is probably a case
> of "if you can't do it right, then you shouldn't be doing it at all" IMO.
>
Thinking about it more, I see both sides and honestly, I can't choose.
Sorry to be absolutely no help Coren :-D I wouldn't oppose emailing
him though.
Shell Kinney
----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 14:35:34 2010
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:35:34 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimMVAttYGPQsJKReQWMkZLazmZwFsiM9w-xvV6Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 6 July 2010 10:19, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> On 06/07/2010 10:15 AM, Michelle Kinney wrote:
> > Is he double-dipping or just contributing to the discussion logged out
> > to avoid associating his viewpoint with his account? If it's the
> > former, it needs more than a quiet email, but the latter - well, I can
> > understand being concerned about your privacy over this issue.
> >
>
> No double dips, hence my original thought of the quiet email. I'm still
> not comfortable about an admin participating in /policy discussion/
> while logged out, but I know some of us are a bit more lenient regarding
> multiple accounts so I brought it here first. This is probably a case
> of "if you can't do it right, then you shouldn't be doing it at all" IMO.
>
>
>
It's a double edged sword; we've banned people in part for participation in
policy discussions in this manner (PrivateMusings comes to mind, though this
wasn't his only issue.) On the other hand, he has very clearly identified
his RL identity (down to his business email address) with his usual account
name, and this may be a situation where the "separating one's edits"
situation comes into play. It takes a fairly brave heart to edit a page
that's so obviously associated with paedophilia.
I do note that the "User:Tastes bad actually" account had a bit of a
disagreement with Delicious carbuncle on a userpage. (The user,
OfficialRollingStones, seems to have accidentally "outed" an OTRS admin,
corrected his error, and Delicious carbuncle has been pursuing this, asking
who "Joe Daly" is. I've given a couple of the OTRS admins a heads up, since
I understand that OTRS agent is AFK for a few weeks.) It's not clear at all
what was going on there, but Delicious carbuncle seems to have a penchant
for stuff like this.
I'm always on the lenient side of things when it comes to stuff like this;
I'd go with the email warning.
Risker/Anne
----------
From stevethearbitrator at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 14:36:02 2010
From: stevethearbitrator at gmail.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 11:36:02 -0300
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
I say leave it be - there's no violation of policy, and an e-mail
would carry "Big brother is watching undertones.
----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 14:44:43 2010
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 10:44:43 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 6 July 2010 10:36, Steve Smith <stevethearbitrator at gmail.com> wrote:
> I say leave it be - there's no violation of policy, and an e-mail
> would carry "Big brother is watching undertones.
>
Erm, yes it is against policy: "Undisclosed alternative accounts should not
edit policies, guidelines, or their talk pages; comment in Arbitration
proceedings; or vote in requests for
adminship<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship>,
deletion debates, or elections<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Elections>
.[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOCK#cite_note-0> "
(Ha! and I see the reference is to the Privatemusings case...)
And it's also in keeping with policy: "*Privacy*: A person editing an
article which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or
professional circle, and whose Wikipedia identity is known within that
circle, or traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an
alternative account to avoid real-world consequences from their editing or
other Wikipedia actions in that area. "
Of the two, now that we know the connection between the accounts, I'd prefer
to go with the "privacy" provisions. I'd suggest that any email clearly
imply that we are making that assumption.
Risker/Anne
----------
From carcharothwp at googlemail.com Tue Jul 6 14:57:07 2010
From: carcharothwp at googlemail.com (Carcharoth)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 15:57:07 +0100
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
You also missed out the bold bit on the first quote: "Editing project space".
Carcharoth
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Tue Jul 6 14:55:48 2010
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 10:55:48 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the
pedo kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org> <AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com> <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org> <AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4C3343F4.2050206@uberbox.org>
On 06/07/2010 10:44 AM, Risker wrote:
>
>
> And it's also in keeping with policy: "*Privacy*: A person editing an
> article which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or
> professional circle, and whose Wikipedia identity is known within that
> circle, or traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an
> alternative account to avoid real-world consequences from their
> editing or other Wikipedia actions in that area. "
>
Well yes, but it's clear that this concerns /contents/, not meta or
policy discussion. I don't see those as conflicting: the sum is "You
can use an alternate account to avoid controversial matter being
associated with your account but that does not extend to discussion of
policy and internal matters." Right?
Suggested email:
Hello Ixfd64,
There is technical evidence that points to you having edited the
Wikipedia talk:Child protection page while logged out. While policy
generally allows alternate accounts to edit controversial material when
it is inadvisable to have the material associated with their identity,
that allowance does not extend to discussion of policy or internal
procedural matters.
I understand that the policy is controversial, and that some opinions
expressed there may be very unpopular, but if it is not reasonable for
you to have your account associated with that discussion then you should
refrain from participating in the debate entirely rather than to do so
while logged out (or from an alternate account). The community -- and
the Committee -- considers that an administrator participating in policy
matters without disclosure is avoiding scrutiny and may be sanctioned.
Given that you do not appear to have participated in that discussion
under multiple identities or in bad faith, the sensitivity of the
matter, and the fact that your account is clearly linked to your real
identity, I have no intention of pressing the matter further as long as
no further edits of the sort take place.
Signed, etc.
-- Coren / Marc
------------
From carcharothwp at googlemail.com Tue Jul 6 14:53:06 2010
From: carcharothwp at googlemail.com (Carcharoth)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 15:53:06 +0100
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6 July 2010 10:36, Steve Smith <stevethearbitrator at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I say leave it be - there's no violation of policy, and an e-mail
>> would carry "Big brother is watching undertones.
>
>
> Erm, yes it is against policy:? "Undisclosed alternative accounts should not
> edit policies, guidelines, or their talk pages; comment in Arbitration
> proceedings; or vote in requests for adminship, deletion debates, or
> elections.[1] "
>
> (Ha! and I see the reference is to the Privatemusings case...)
>
> And it's also in keeping with policy:? "Privacy: A person editing an article
> which is highly controversial within his/her family, social or professional
> circle, and whose Wikipedia identity is known within that circle, or
> traceable to their real-world identity, may wish to use an alternative
> account to avoid real-world consequences from their editing or other
> Wikipedia actions in that area. "
>
> Of the two, now that we know the connection between the accounts, I'd prefer
> to go with the "privacy" provisions.? I'd suggest that any email clearly
> imply that we are making that assumption.
Actually, the one quote mentions practically everything *except*
articles, while the latter specifically mentions articles. So it seems
there is an exception for controversial *articles* but not for
controversial *discussions* and *policies*.
Of course, the "other Wikipedia actions in that area" makes it all
contradictory again.
Carcharoth
----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 17:39:41 2010
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 13:39:41 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
My vote is to take no action of any sort.
Newyorkbrad
-----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 18:01:24 2010
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 14:01:24 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
The more I think about it, the less inclined I am to take action as well;
it's actually pretty difficult to justify the checkuser in the first place
("usual trolls" doesn't really cut it when his arguments are cogent and
reasonable, and no more off-topic than that of many other respected
editors).
Risker/Anne
----------
From carcharothwp at googlemail.com Tue Jul 6 18:05:27 2010
From: carcharothwp at googlemail.com (Carcharoth)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:05:27 +0100
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinc8knVu0Cexig4IFShJdY1AJ_0wd9XcmOGkChN@mail.gmail.com>
Is it not worth posting a reminder on that page that people should use
their accounts to edit project pages and project talk pages? That
should, in theory, shut all the IP editors up. Unless you want people
to think it is OK to log out and edit that talk page (in which case
lots of people will probably start doing so).
Carcharoth
-----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 18:16:17 2010
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 14:16:17 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinc8knVu0Cexig4IFShJdY1AJ_0wd9XcmOGkChN@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinc8knVu0Cexig4IFShJdY1AJ_0wd9XcmOGkChN@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTil26wX1kT_U1p355s5q0ajCNSccPGswS-X0-m93@mail.gmail.com>
I dunno. It's a rock and a hard place; we either forego the opinions of a
significant portion of the community whose accounts are linked to their real
names but who don't want their names to be linked with "pedophilia", or we
force them to link their RL identities to such a discussion if they
participate. I note that there aren't very many people participating in
these discussions who edit with their RL names or with linked identities
already.
Risker/Anne
----------
From marc at uberbox.org Tue Jul 6 18:43:27 2010
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:43:27 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the
pedo kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org> <AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com> <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org> <AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
On 06/07/2010 2:01 PM, Risker wrote:
> The more I think about it, the less inclined I am to take action as
> well; it's actually pretty difficult to justify the checkuser in the
> first place ("usual trolls" doesn't really cut it when his arguments
> are cogent and reasonable, and no more off-topic than that of many
> other respected editors).
>
That, I disagree with. An obviously current editor that just shows up
on a controversial policy talk? Pretty much by definition this is a
violation of the "do not engage in policy or internals with alternate
accounts" rule. I didn't expect a current admin, but it was an obvious
violation regardless.
At any rate, I went with the quiet email option in my own name (and/or
as a checkuser, but not as an arb). I don't want to make a fuss over
this, and I don't want anybody's head, but I couldn't let something like
this slide and not feel like I was stepping over a big ethical line.
With luck, he'll just go "oh, right, sorry" and desist and everybody
will be happy.
-- Coren / Marc
----------
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 15:58:20 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around
the pedo kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org> <AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com> <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org> <AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
Start with a private email. Doing nothing is not the way to go.
R
-----------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 19:59:38 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 15:59:38 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
I have no problem with the quiet word Coren has sent, I like it very little,
but understand the competing concerns here.
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Randy Everette <rlevse at cox.net> wrote:
> Start with a private email. Doing nothing is not the way to go.
>
-----------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 21:53:31 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 17:53:31 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
And it's getting a bit testy, Delicious carbuncle threatened the IP editor
with a block (of his named account as well).. I had a word with Dc asking
him to deal with it in a better fashion..
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...104901(Dc's
removal of the threat)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...id=372105732(my
request to Dc)
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:59 PM, David Yellope <dyellope.wiki at gmail.com>wrote:
> I have no problem with the quiet word Coren has sent, I like it very
> little, but understand the competing concerns here.
-----------
From newyorkbrad at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 22:01:37 2010
From: newyorkbrad at gmail.com (Newyorkbrad)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 18:01:37 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
This whole discussion (about the IP posting) still strikes me as a solution
in search of a problem.
Newyorkbrad
----------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 22:07:37 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 18:07:37 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
if we have a quiet word, and it's fixed, it's no problem what so ever. But
with Dc being so aggressive, it has the ability to at least become a
problem.
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Newyorkbrad <newyorkbrad at gmail.com> wrote:
> This whole discussion (about the IP posting) still strikes me as a solution
> in search of a problem.
>
> Newyorkbrad
----------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 22:21:57 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 18:21:57 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
The reason that Dc is pushing this so hard, is that he feels that this is
Benjiboi, evading sanctions. I'm trying to tell him its not the case without
being A) demanding or B) violating the PRIVACY policy.
(email DC sent me in a reply to what I sent him)
I have strong suspicions, based on a number of things, that this is
User:Benjiboi, who has recently been editing using IPs in the 71.139.x.x
range. This appears to have been mostly to annoy User:Schrandit at various
articles and fora. I think it is very likely that they were also the
recently indef blocked User:Comfort Shoe, which was the block evasion to
which I alluded.
Would a list of IPs be of any use?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.38.122
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ns/71.139.19.85
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.39.160
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.29.193
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ons/71.139.7.28
-----------
From KnightLago at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 22:40:20 2010
From: KnightLago at gmail.com (KnightLago)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 18:40:20 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
Alison just blocked "Tastes bad actually" for abusing multiple accounts. The
CU log notation says:
18:34, 6 July 2010, Alison <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alison> got IP
addresses for Tastes bad
actually<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tastes_bad_actually&action=edit&redlink=1>
(talk<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tastes_bad_actually&action=edit&redlink=1>
|
contribs<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tastes_bad_actually>
|
block <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Block/Tastes_bad_actually>)
(Disruptive
sockpuppeteering / email req / Comfort_shoe again / WP:SCRUTINY & WP:NPA)
Coren, are you saying the above account and User:Ixfd64 are the same person?
Because Alison's notation seems to indicate she thinks this is Comfort_shoe,
whoever that is.
Also, did someone email Alison and request that she run this?
KL
------------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 23:07:56 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:07:56 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTil_ubIolGgll6GGKrI0V0ivLuGgIB0iMsaMYzMl@mail.gmail.com>
I didn't email Alison previously, but seeing this, I did email her. My email
and her reply are copied here:
(me)
Regarding the Tastes bad actually block.. would you mind telling me what's
up with that.. and could you compare/contrast to 71.139.2.170 and Ixfd64?
it was bad enough that a low level admin was posting anon in that section,
but if Ixfd64 is linked there too, we have a problem.
Don't act, just let me know.
(Alison)
Foz, It's Benjiboi. For certain.
I was seconds away from posting this on the talk page of 71.139.2.170;
:: Actually, you've also been using [[WP:SPA|single-purpose accounts]] to
mess about with [[User:Delicious Carbuncle]]. [[User:Tastes bad
actually|This account]] is yours, for example. Now, you cannot claim
anonymity like this when you're indulging in textbook abusive sockpuppetry.
Right now, given that I ''know'' what your main account is, I'm seriously
concerned that this is a case of [[WP:SCRUTINY]] and [[WP:GHBH]], and I've
seen nothing to convince me otherwise, given your clear agenda against
[[User:Delicious Carbuncle]] here. Same with your main account ''as well you
know''. - ~~~~
.. but will hold off! I'm seeing this as a case of sockery, where Benji is
1) continuing his long-standing dispute with Carbuncle using socks, 2)
creating SPAs to follow him around to harass him and 3) using IPs to avoid
scrutiny and post arguably pro-pedo stuff (or pro-stupidity!
) stuff intodebates. All of this is basically wrong and he needs to knock it off.
-- Allie
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:40 PM, KnightLago <KnightLago at gmail.com> wrote:
> Alison just blocked "Tastes bad actually" for abusing multiple accounts.
From marc at uberbox.org Tue Jul 6 23:13:54 2010
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:13:54 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt 6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B6E702B-2F68-414A-8C38-9A0E59CC8F2D@uberbox.org>
I didn't talk to anyone outside ArcCom about it, but yes; it's the same account (Allie probably didn't check the whole /20 or she is leery about whacking an admin and we'll hear from her soon).
I'm at the airport about to board, so I'll not be around long. Status: i've sent the email to the admin and got no response yet. No other on- or off-wiki actions done except this thread.
--
Sent from my iPhone
On 2010-07-06, at 18:40, KnightLago <KnightLago at gmail.com> wrote:
> Alison just blocked "Tastes bad actually" for abusing multiple accounts. The CU log notation says:
>
-----------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 23:17:40 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:17:40 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <1C08F96A-B6D9-4AB5-97F6-1297C8B7106F@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
<1C08F96A-B6D9-4AB5-97F6-1297C8B7106F@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikmOav8VSOyGD_-lq4-Zd4BX_7gOwkLoxpiVG_Z@mail.gmail.com>
Ok, miscommunication with Allie, waiting for more...
Whoa!!! I'm not sure about where Ixfd64 fits into this at all!
Yes, the IP is Benji & he's been using that San Francisco range for the
longest time - but I dunno about the other guy. I saw it coming up in checks
but as the account is ancient, I just let it slide. Let me dig into this one
further.
User:Comfort shoe is also a blocked sock of Benjiboi - same modus operandi;
messing around DC, complaining about Wikipedia Review, etc, etc. This time,
he got caught in the crossfire and was blocked as a sock of User:A Nobody.
Oops! I've an email question pending with Milowent over that whole block,
BTW.
See these;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ns/71.139.31.13
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ns/71.139.19.85
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.44.220
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.39.160
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.29.193
- blocked
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...ons/71.139.7.28
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.32.152
Edit-warring with Schrandit, etc, etc. He seems to drop IPs to start warring
again.
And what the heck is this??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contr...s/71.139.32.152
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=312312217
Regards
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> I didn't talk to anyone outside ArcCom about it, but yes; it's the same
> account (Allie probably didn't check the whole /20 or she is leery about
> whacking an admin and we'll hear from her soon).
>
-----------
From marc at uberbox.org Tue Jul 6 23:17:58 2010
From: marc at uberbox.org (Marc A. Pelletier)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:17:58 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <4B6E702B-2F68-414A-8C38-9A0E59CC8F2D@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt 6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
<4B6E702B-2F68-414A-8C38-9A0E59CC8F2D@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <ED31263E-C27E-485E-9455-142B02C038B8@uberbox.org>
About to board. Support emerg. Procedures in needed
--
Sent from my iPhone
On 2010-07-06, at 19:13, "Marc A. Pelletier" <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> I didn't talk to anyone outside ArcCom about it, but yes; it's the same account (Allie probably didn't check the whole /20 or she is leery about whacking an admin and we'll hear from her soon).
----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 23:32:23 2010
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:32:23 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <4B6E702B-2F68-414A-8C38-9A0E59CC8F2D@uberbox.org>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimEe-2jNsSdyHdShq4RY0wVVN_fObvIGqEc0vL-@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilcUmUf4FaWEnYcqTwfyJdDGsmWZfwlfWtewRCQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimJERI4XuC-2pIxqTw3gt6ilbV7OO0YYI-YukKP@mail.gmail.com>
<4B6E702B-2F68-414A-8C38-9A0E59CC8F2D@uberbox.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTildYeGBE_9J94n7p9dKop3wdXMB_-wgLWqvTZM0@mail.gmail.com>
Well, I have just checked the whole /20, and I'm quite hesitant to
agree with your finding, Marc.
The Benjiboi account:
(diff<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Pedophilia&curid=27124711&diff=371725813&oldid=371725648>)
(hist<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Pedophilia&curid=27124711&action=history>)
. . Wikipedia talk:Pedophilia<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Pedophilia>.
. 17:25 . .
71.139.2.170<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/71.139.2.170>
(talk <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:71.139.2.170> |
block<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Block/71.139.2.170>
) *(Thoughts: )
* *IP*: 71.139.2.170<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CheckUser&user=71.139.2.170>
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4; en-us)
AppleWebKit/533.16 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0 Safari/533.16
The admin account:
(diff<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plain_view_doctrine&curid=1968893&diff=371561895&oldid=368526037>)
(hist<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plain_view_doctrine&curid=1968893&action=history>)
. . *m* Plain view
doctrine<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plain_view_doctrine>. . 16:20 .
.
Ixfd64 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ixfd64>
(talk<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ixfd64> |
contribs <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ixfd64> |
block<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Block/Ixfd64>
) *(Previously blocked<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AIxfd64>
)* *(Disambiguate **Seize* <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seize>* to **
Confiscation* <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confiscation>* using
**popups*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups>
*)*
*IP*: 71.139.13.136<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CheckUser&user=71.139.13.136>
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_4; en-us)
AppleWebKit/533.16 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0 Safari/533.16 (standard
run of the mill Mac setup)
(diff<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rescue_and_recovery_effort_after_the_September_11_attacks&curid=28066&diff=371644723&oldid=371407197>)
(hist<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rescue_and_recovery_effort_after_the_September_11_attacks&curid=28066&action=history>)
. . *m* Rescue and recovery effort after the September 11
attacks<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_and_recovery_effort_after_the_September_11_attacks>.
. 03:30 . .
Ixfd64 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ixfd64>
(talk<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ixfd64> |
contribs <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ixfd64> |
block<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Block/Ixfd64>
) *(Previously blocked<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AIxfd64>
)* *(Disambiguate **Swift Boat* <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swift_Boat>*to
**Swiftboating* <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating>* using
**popups*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups>
*)*
*IP*: 71.139.13.136<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CheckUser&user=71.139.13.136>
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR
2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.30729)
He's using both UAs interchangeably. There are several other accounts with
that generic Mac setup; most non-tech people upgrade when they get the
little window on their screen, so it makes sense that accounts will upgrade
in lockstep.
Have you received a response from the admin account yet? I am pretty sure
if we did a cross-reference with Benjiboi, we'd find that it's not possible
that they are the same. I wonder if Frank might be available to do one of
his graphs?
Risker/Anne
On 6 July 2010 19:13, Marc A. Pelletier <marc at uberbox.org> wrote:
> I didn't talk to anyone outside ArcCom about it, but yes; it's the same
> account (Allie probably didn't check the whole /20 or she is
-----------
From risker.wp at gmail.com Tue Jul 6 23:34:19 2010
From: risker.wp at gmail.com (Risker)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:34:19 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Accounts to look at (re: PPA)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikrL49mUo4SNp3ao_YecLlk6o5S2wshaqZAkZz2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimY2j245ytsTb3Gk1rmZP4pOIkdz-m1NhsNr3PD@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhcrQ9gmsG1cTk5m7vQvxrqG6rhwODU2CgpjzJ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikrL49mUo4SNp3ao_YecLlk6o5S2wshaqZAkZz2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikFPk0P8wsiIoGJD5HVAdhBsvNjZohWNEo8BKmR@mail.gmail.com>
Well, as I mention in the other thread, I don't think there's grounds to
block Ixfd64's account at this point. What he has in common with Benjiboi is
the most common Mac UA around, and there are other accounts on that range
with the same UA, who also aren't Benjiboi.
Risker/Anne
-----------
From rlevse at cox.net Tue Jul 6 23:56:10 2010
From: rlevse at cox.net (Randy Everette)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 19:56:10 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the
pedo kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org> <AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com> <4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org> <AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com> <4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org> <022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net> <AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <02b101cb1d66$cec24920$6c46db60$@net>
Doing Nothing is totally the wrong approach here. We catch this guy and we
ignore it? Uh nuh.
R
------------
From dyellope.wiki at gmail.com Wed Jul 7 00:21:10 2010
From: dyellope.wiki at gmail.com (David Yellope)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 20:21:10 -0400
Subject: [arbcom-l] Problem ahead with admin socking around the pedo
kerrufle?
In-Reply-To: <02b101cb1d66$cec24920$6c46db60$@net>
References: <4C333701.4000109@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTilYWyLR6tRxtRpUp5-IpcBcNMtwjKaE17XgU682@mail.gmail.com>
<4C333B59.3010200@uberbox.org>
<AANLkTil50WpAyKFw8F2kWaTKYb0AhL-94nuPJp_yexOA@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTinhuIg61GpnDpM-DRBlg0wtTXaa60v-GmQ4Bs5p@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimHxPFBpgmDKrMyG32wcapUpGzwbuG8d3RkaSzQ@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHK55fwrO08bMlYiLyk_NHvhXM0pzf7321GIEY@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilvrk88qNrVFXIe-ynayd7I0xUW72yEaMCu3sEt@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTimu5lRBtMKUpN-MXeAWwkp-jf1lpeiDx2KgsI06@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikHXTuCOJZhBzMXS2xyiG20LWKful0N6KSkmAPG@mail.gmail.com>
<4C33794F.5020308@uberbox.org>
<022401cb1d45$957b3620$c071a260$@net>
<AANLkTikci0kXMXPUGS6X8mb3LjaIHi9ldTFbAGQhju0z@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikO-KK5jtMitdXdTMpgr-twu2vY3fKjUwjpfcCe@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTikmrEqXOkkDdqqflEbSkkIz4ZcGPXzxT3znbcAP@mail.gmail.com>
<02b101cb1d66$cec24920$6c46db60$@net>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzYZ6oNzV9xuDD0RCD4G_c0Sl23S0NomYa4rvX@mail.gmail.com>
71.139.2.170 translates to a DSL address. Doesn't look like it floats a
whole bunch
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Randy Everette <rlevse at cox.net> wrote:
> Doing Nothing is totally the wrong approach here. We catch this guy and
> we ignore it? Uh nuh.
>
>
>
> R
