Little Green Rosetta

Sweet Revenge · Unread post by **Sweet Revenge** » Mon May 20, 2013 8:51 am

NaymanNoland wrote:And yeah, the word "monster" is probably over the top. And yes, we're all sinners. But there are greater and lesser sinners in this world. And this guy wins some kind of prize.

Not really, he's just another creep on the internet. Not notable on Wikipedia, not even notable in the annals of sin. Pretty sad case, that. Perhaps this should be in the Qworty thread, because I'd really like to see that little troglodyte LGR torn to shreds and this nonsense is derailing the effort.

NaymanNoland · Unread post by **NaymanNoland** » Mon May 20, 2013 8:54 am

Yeah, it's getting digressive. But just to stress: I'm not being evasive at all - if you see that, you're misunderstanding me.

I was one of the first to insist that this trog get torn to shreds, and I'm still very much in the trog-shred camp. Just defining terms, that's all.

NaymanNoland · Unread post by **NaymanNoland** » Mon May 20, 2013 2:07 pm

Hm. Reading over this a few hours later - after revisiting some of this troll's ugliness over there - I can see how I look evasive. It was NOT an effort to save LGR's hide. Can someone maybe move the outing discussion over to the relevant topic?

Rosetta really is vile. And I quote my final exchange with him/her/it:

== Qworty... apology accepted ==

I just wanted to thank you for apologizing for tag-teaming with Qworty. Now that we know who he is, I imagine it's mortifying to discover that you've been supporting him unthinkingly for all this time, and inadvertently (?) contributing to his vengeful destruction of hundreds of Wikipedia articles. At any rate, apology accepted. - NaymanNoland

:You might want to up your dosage, as I made no apology. Wikipedia has far too many BLP subjects inserting unsourced PR material into "their" own articles. I stand by those editors that follow our core policies on sourcing and NPOV. - Little_green_rosetta

::*Oh, you didn't apologize? My mistake. I just assumed that - like any decent person - you would be mortified, and perhaps wish to hide your head in shame. And perhaps undo all of the vengeful edits that you supported as snarkily and self-righteously as possible. I apologize for misreading you. Carry on. - NaymanNoland

::::Trolls will kindly fuck off my page. Guess which category I would put you in? - Little_green_rosetta

NaymanNoland · Unread post by **NaymanNoland** » Mon May 20, 2013 2:13 pm

This gets a whole lot worse when you note this very civil passive-aggressive post to my talk page AFTER that exchange:

Hello, I'm Little green rosetta. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person, Robert Clark Young, but that you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - little green rosetta

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Mon May 20, 2013 2:50 pm

DanMurphy wrote:Not my area of expertise, but isn't like 40% or more of the USA on a comcast cable modem?

Depends on how you define the denominator of "the USA", but the numerator is 19,799,000 Comcast Internet service accounts. That includes probably about 19 million households, and about 800K businesses. I think there are about 115 million households and about 10 million businesses in the United States. So, the penetration rate is more like 16% than 40%. However, it's pretty safe to say that Comcast service is available to about 40% of the residential and business locations across the United States.

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Tue May 21, 2013 3:01 am

07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@173-13-206-173-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #wikipedia-en
07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@173-13-206-173-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Changing host]
07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@unaffiliated/greenrosetta] has joined #wikipedia-en

Which leads to:

CustName: EXPERT CHOICE INC
Address: 2111 WILSON BLVD
City: ARLINGTON
StateProv: VA
PostalCode: 22201
Country: US

http://expertchoice.com/

A federal software contractor. Small company. He/she/it probably works there.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue May 21, 2013 3:50 am

http://expertchoice.com/wisdom-of-the-c ... on-making/

Hrm.

Ernest Forman
Co founder of Expert Choice & Professor of Decision Sciences at George Washington University

http://business.gwu.edu/faculty/ernest_forman.cfm

Interesting and talented fellow.

Notable?

Expert Choice (T-H-L) the software has a stub.

Analytic hierarchy process (T-H-L) one of their theories has an article.

The other founder is Thomas L. Saaty (T-H-L). He's notable.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue May 21, 2013 4:02 am

Significant socking around the topics...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... er/Archive

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Tue May 21, 2013 4:50 am

Zoloft wrote:Analytic hierarchy process (T-H-L) one of their theories has an article.

Significant socking around the topics...

That article is a textbook case of socking to control content. Could not be more obvious.

Very weird story. LGR does occasional heavy vandal patrolling, and has spent a lot of time editing articles relating to right-wing politics, especially Focus on the Family (T-H-L), Southern Poverty Law Center (T-H-L), Family Research Council (T-H-L) etc. Not a peep about Expert Choice, analytic hierarchy process, Saaty, or related items that I can find.

If LGR is Belchfire, then he's been socking his own ban discussion. And his own talkpage. Badly too.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue May 21, 2013 5:15 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Zoloft wrote:Analytic hierarchy process (T-H-L) one of their theories has an article.

Significant socking around the topics...
That article is a textbook case of socking to control content. Could not be more obvious.

Very weird story. LGR does occasional heavy vandal patrolling, and has spent a lot of time editing articles relating to right-wing politics, especially Focus on the Family (T-H-L), Southern Poverty Law Center (T-H-L), Family Research Council (T-H-L) etc. Not a peep about Expert Choice, analytic hierarchy process, Saaty, or related items that I can find.

If LGR is Belchfire, then he's been socking his own ban discussion. And his own talkpage. Badly too.

I don't think we're near the 'handle' part yet.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue May 21, 2013 5:26 am

Sounds like someone should make a call the the principals at Expert Choice and let them know their network infrastructure has been compromised by LGR.

NaymanNoland · Unread post by **NaymanNoland** » Tue May 21, 2013 6:12 am

Are we absolutely sure that little green rosetta is not Qworty himself? I just stumbled over this early interaction with him, after he colluded to have me blocked:

"Now there are many problems with some of your edits, but nothing that can't be fixed. We are willing to work with you to improve these articles."

If he's not Qworty, he sure went to the same finishing school: faux-polite, exquisitely condescending, about as helpful as thumbtack on a chair.

NaymanNoland · Unread post by **NaymanNoland** » Tue May 21, 2013 6:15 am

Oh, and dig this highly neutral advice, all about good faith and shit. My first contact with little green rosetta:

"I was going to template you to WP:AGF with Qworty, but decided to leave a more personal message. In any case, there are many many people watching the Filpacachi (sic) articles so please back away from Qworty for the next few days. You are of course free to ignore my advice, but stepping back might be best for everyone."

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Tue May 21, 2013 7:12 am

Admittedly, I think I did not actually have LGR's IP, but I still am fairly certain LGR is not Qworty. I should also note that I do not think LGR is Belchfire either. I recall Belchfire had a certain incontinence that is not shared by LGR. That is simply Viriditas trying to paint all his conservative enemies with one broad brush as is common with these types of battleground areas. First, you get someone blocked. Then you see if they sock. If they do you accuse any subsequent opponent of being that editor's sock. If they are obviously not a sock, accuse them of enabling that editor's socks or just being on the same side as that editor's socks (this works especially well for gaining an advantage in edit wars over legitimate content disputes, simply repeat WP:DENY for every revert regardless of who is being reverted). Also, if your own allies get found out as socks, quickly disavow all knowledge of their actions and voice your spirited support for their bagging and tagging. Rack up points for your determined efforts at fighting ebil sockpuppetry. There you have the gamer's guide to sock-hunting.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Tue May 21, 2013 7:39 am

Zoloft wrote:Significant socking around the topics...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... er/Archive

Lou Sander (T-C-L) is this guy, who tried to get his block for socky-socky overturned just the other day. (His website is, shall we say, something of an exercise in self-congratulation, but I've seen worse.) I doubt he's Little green rosetta (T-C-L); there isn't a single mention on his website of how he can make a muffin betta, and he apparently doesn't even drive a sexy red Barchetta.

Having said that, this entire line of inquiry strikes me as rather excessive. It's true that Mr. Rosetta (LGR) should not be allowed to edit BLP articles, but nobody on Wikipedia should be allowed to edit BLP articles. It doesn't look like LGR is promoting a particular individual over there, or specifically trying to knock down anyone in particular (except for maybe Erica Andrews (T-H-L), where he was egged on by Mr. Qworty). LGR appears to not be especially fond of LGBT people, but it doesn't appear to rise to the level of outright gay-bashing (though I haven't looked at every single diff, natch).

I've been known to be wrong about a lot of these types of things, so don't take my word for it... but I just don't see much to be gained by identifying or otherwise targeting this person.

Unread post by **Zoloft** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:49 am

I see several ways to dox Little Green Rosetta, but have lost interest while further reviewing his contributions. He's nowhere near as bad as Qworty was, and has many positive edits as well.

I am looking at another adjacent editor though. Has a couple double letter sets in his user name. Kinda too easy though.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue May 21, 2013 3:10 pm

Zoloft wrote:I see several ways to dox Little Green Rosetta, but have lost interest while further reviewing his contributions. He's nowhere near as bad as Qworty was, and has many positive edits as well.

I am looking at another adjacent editor though. Has a couple double letter sets in his user name.

I disagree.
LGR comes out of the shadows.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Co ... 13.206.173
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =446691643
Doesn't seem like a new user...

Well, well, well
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =446691643

Fasttimes68 (T-C-L)

A returning, indefinitely blocked (by ARBCOM) user. Quel surprise.

Fasttimes68's last edit
00:54, 8 August 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+221)‎ . . Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard ‎ (→‎Stephanie Adams)

LGR's first edit
14:22, 11 August 2012 (diff | hist) . . (+4)‎ . . Shenandoah Valley Music Festival ‎ (→‎2012 Summer Lineup: Adding/removing wikilink(s))

I think we're done here as far as the user's wikipedia details.

He's got some kind of burning hardon for Stephanie Adams
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... asttimes68

Wow.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... Off2riorob

I have no idea what this guy's issue with Adams is, but he's at least as bad as Qworty.

I know you're reading this LGR/Fasttimes68.
You know how good we are at this.
I'm going to see about getting you in salon.com motherfucker.

Oh, look.
We already knew about this turd.
viewtopic.php?f=16&t=728

Vocal · Unread post by **Vocal** » Tue May 21, 2013 3:48 pm

Um, what? I don't see LGR in any of those links.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue May 21, 2013 3:56 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... anie_Adams

Dollars to doughnuts, the guy behind LGR is the primary on the paid editor scandal at Stephanie Adams.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Tue May 21, 2013 4:42 pm

Vigilant wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... anie_Adams

Dollars to doughnuts, the guy behind LGR is the primary on the paid editor scandal at Stephanie Adams.

Why? I could easily be missing it, but I'm not seeing the connection.

I did find what appears to be a talk page reference to the material he was paid to add, and a comment he was probably paid to follow it up with - I only mention it because IRWolfie is a member here and might recall something about it, but I still don't see how you'd get from Point A to Point R in this case.

Apparently Ms. Adams was an avowed lesbian, and appeared in Playboy Magazine as such, but later got married (to a man) and decided she didn't want to be referred to as a lesbian anymore, but did want her WP article to include this section describing in detail how she took it upon herself to obtain guardianship of her aunt when she (the aunt) contracted Alzheimer's Disease and Ms. Adams didn't like the treatment she was getting in a New Jersey nursing home. I just don't see how the person who was ostensibly paid to add that section, Fbell74 (T-C-L), who is presumably also this guy, is the same person as Little green rosetta - I'm not saying it's impossible, it's just not a conclusion I would draw.

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Tue May 21, 2013 5:48 pm

Vigilant wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... anie_Adams

Dollars to doughnuts, the guy behind LGR is the primary on the paid editor scandal at Stephanie Adams.

Hmmm the only area where LGR and Fasttimes were both highly active is the Chick-Fil-A article and their respective actions there appear to be of a different nature.

SB_Johnny · Unread post by **SB_Johnny** » Tue May 21, 2013 6:11 pm

Vigilant wrote:I'm going to see about getting you in salon.com motherfucker.

I hope we're not going to be adopting that as our new mission statement...

Unread post by **tarantino** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:01 pm

Midsize Jake wrote: Why? I could easily be missing it, but I'm not seeing the connection.

Fastimes68 was banned by arbcom, and 3 days later LGR shows up.

They both have done wiki business from the offices of Expert Choice, a company of 10-50 employees.

07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@173-13-206-173-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Changing host]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =446691643 <- Fasttimes signing an ip edit

also,
15:37 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@c-98-204-58-89.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
[18:51] * Fasttimes68 (n=Fasttime@c-69-143-162-48.hsd1.va.comcast.net) Quit (Client Quit)

Could all be coincidences, but probably not.

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:34 pm

tarantino wrote:They both have done wiki business from the offices of Expert Choice, a company of 10-50 employees...

Ah, okay. I thought Mr. Vigilant was referring to Fbell74 when he wrote "primary on the paid editor scandal," not Fasttimes68. This makes more sense, though I'd still have to say, the interests of Fasttimes68 and LGR don't intersect as much as I'd hope to see in such cases. And Expert Choice is an IT company, so they're more likely to have multiple employees who mess around on WP during work hours. For all we know, they might even encourage it.

Sweet Revenge · Unread post by **Sweet Revenge** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:39 pm

tarantino wrote:
Midsize Jake wrote: Why? I could easily be missing it, but I'm not seeing the connection.
Fastimes68 was banned by arbcom, and 3 days later LGR shows up.

They both have done wiki business from the offices of Expert Choice, a company of 10-50 employees.

07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@173-13-206-173-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Changing host]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =446691643 <- Fasttimes signing an ip edit

also,
15:37 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@c-98-204-58-89.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
[18:51] * Fasttimes68 (n=Fasttime@c-69-143-162-48.hsd1.va.comcast.net) Quit (Client Quit)

Could all be coincidences, but probably not.

There's a tenuous Zappa connection too, since Moon Unit was in the sitcom version of Fast Times at Ridgemont High, called simply Fast Times. I can't account for the 68, although the show only ran one season in 1986.

lilburne · Unread post by **lilburne** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:43 pm

Sweet Revenge wrote: There's a tenuous Zappa connection too, since Moon Unit was in the sitcom version of Fast Times at Ridgemont High, called simply Fast Times. I can't account for the 68, although the show only ran one season in 1986.

No?

Sweet Revenge · Unread post by **Sweet Revenge** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:46 pm

lilburne wrote:
Sweet Revenge wrote: There's a tenuous Zappa connection too, since Moon Unit was in the sitcom version of Fast Times at Ridgemont High, called simply Fast Times. I can't account for the 68, although the show only ran one season in 1986.
No?

That occurred to me but it seemed too Bible Codesy... it certainly doesn't make it seem less likely.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:46 pm

There are potential criminal and/or civil legal ramifications with this situation.
I am waiting for contact from an outside person.

I can say with utter confidence that I know that LGR and Fasttimes68 are the same person.
I know this person's name, address, phone number, employer, parents, etc, etc.

You guys have seen my work.

I have no qualms saying that this person is worse than Qworty.

Anroth · Unread post by **Anroth** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:50 pm

Unread post by **Midsize Jake** » Tue May 21, 2013 8:52 pm

Vigilant wrote:There are potential criminal and/or civil legal ramifications with this situation.
I am waiting for contact from an outside person.

Zappa himself?

Wait a minute, he's deceased... I guess I should give up, I'm just getting more confused.

lightspeed · Unread post by **lightspeed** » Tue May 21, 2013 9:09 pm

This person isn't that savvy either if they are logging onto IRC using their employer's Internet connection (from captured IP).

Vigilant wrote:There are potential criminal and/or civil legal ramifications with this situation.
I am waiting for contact from an outside person.

I can say with utter confidence that I know that LGR and Fasttimes68 are the same person.
I know this person's name, address, phone number, employer, parents, etc, etc.

You guys have seen my work.

I have no qualms saying that this person is worse than Qworty.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Tue May 21, 2013 9:13 pm

tarantino wrote:Fastimes68 was banned by arbcom, and 3 days later LGR shows up.

They both have done wiki business from the offices of Expert Choice, a company of 10-50 employees.

07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@173-13-206-173-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Changing host]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =446691643 <- Fasttimes signing an ip edit

also,
15:37 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@c-98-204-58-89.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
[18:51] * Fasttimes68 (n=Fasttime@c-69-143-162-48.hsd1.va.comcast.net) Quit (Client Quit)

Could all be coincidences, but probably not.

If you guys keep picking off these innocent customers of Comcast Business, you're eventually going to put me out of a job!

TungstenCarbide · Unread post by **TungstenCarbide** » Tue May 21, 2013 9:35 pm

Vigilant wrote:There are potential criminal and/or civil legal ramifications with this situation.
I am waiting for contact from an outside person.

I can say with utter confidence that I know that LGR and Fasttimes68 are the same person.
I know this person's name, address, phone number, employer, parents, etc, etc.

You guys have seen my work.

I have no qualms saying that this person is worse than Qworty.

you are a river.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue May 21, 2013 9:39 pm

TungstenCarbide wrote:
Vigilant wrote:There are potential criminal and/or civil legal ramifications with this situation.
I am waiting for contact from an outside person.

I can say with utter confidence that I know that LGR and Fasttimes68 are the same person.
I know this person's name, address, phone number, employer, parents, etc, etc.

You guys have seen my work.

I have no qualms saying that this person is worse than Qworty.
you are a river.

Yet I am poor...

EricBarbour · Unread post by **EricBarbour** » Tue May 21, 2013 9:47 pm

Vigilant wrote:
TungstenCarbide wrote: you are a river.
Yet I am poor...

I wub you, too. Blecch.

If FT68 is a denizen of BanniNation, he might be a somewhat-notorious net troll. Seems to me.

Unread post by **Smiley** » Tue May 21, 2013 9:56 pm

In 2008, Fasttimes68 wrote:Tom and Mike have been on a 12 hour acid trip and want to go to sleep but are still tripping. They decide to do a bong bong so they can sleep. Tom holds a filled beer bong while Mike takes a full hit off of a bong. Mike holds the smoke inside of his lungs and then drinks the beer bong and then exhales. Tom and Mike reverse positions so Tom can do his bong bong. They repeat this process until they pass out.

Like, yeah, dude..

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Tue May 21, 2013 10:25 pm

Nice to see a banned suckpuppeteer colluding with someone else to get a sockpuppet banned and then revert their edits.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk: ... hy_I_drink.

Here's another example of them doing this.

06:00, 18 February 2013 (diff | hist) . . (+996)‎ . . Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ (→‎User:Belchfire reported by - MrX (Result: ))

And another
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk: ... r_on_Women

And another:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: ... RyLaughlin
This one is particularly hilarious given LGRs background.

Giving up his age, while demeaning someone
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... 0554#OSHCR
"Hell in a bucket" was a Grateful Dead concert. It was held at Red Rocks Amphitheatre

mac · Unread post by **mac** » Tue May 21, 2013 11:25 pm

Sweet Revenge wrote:
lilburne wrote:
Sweet Revenge wrote: There's a tenuous Zappa connection too, since Moon Unit was in the sitcom version of Fast Times at Ridgemont High, called simply Fast Times. I can't account for the 68, although the show only ran one season in 1986.
No?
That occurred to me but it seemed too Bible Codesy... it certainly doesn't make it seem less likely.

Those born in '68 would be in the (high school) class of '86.

Vocal · Unread post by **Vocal** » Wed May 22, 2013 11:18 am

LGR fighting Benjiboi.

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Wed May 22, 2013 1:35 pm

mac wrote:Those born in '68 would be in the (high school) class of '86.

I can personally confirm this.

Vigilant · Unread post by **Vigilant** » Wed May 22, 2013 2:59 pm

Looks like arbcom got there first. Indefinitely blocked with the arbcom label.

And a couple of socks

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Wed May 22, 2013 3:02 pm

So why was he Arbcom blocked? I have found this thread very difficult to follow.

Because he was an asshole? Wouldn't they have to ding half their contributors if that was the reason?

Oh, I see. The presumption is that he's a sockpuppet of Fasttimes68 (T-C-L), who was also mysteriously (mysterious to me at least) "blocked by Arbcom" about a year ago.

I've only ever seen the "respect my authoritah" arbcom blocks without any explanation at all before for suspected pedophiles. That doesn't seem to be the case with this one (not a whiff of it in the contributions).

So, again, what's going on?

The Devil's Advocate · Unread post by **The Devil's Advocate** » Wed May 22, 2013 3:42 pm

DanMurphy wrote:So why was he Arbcom blocked? I have found this thread very difficult to follow.

Because he was an asshole? Wouldn't they have to ding half their contributors if that was the reason?

Oh, I see. The presumption is that he's a sockpuppet of Fasttimes68 (T-C-L), who was also mysteriously (mysterious to me at least) "blocked by Arbcom" about a year ago.

I've only ever seen the "respect my authoritah" arbcom blocks without any explanation at all before for suspected pedophiles. That doesn't seem to be the case with this one (not a whiff of it in the contributions).

So, again, what's going on?

Fasttimes was blocked, presumably, for shenanigans involving the article on Stephanie Adams (T-H-L). LGR seems to be have been using the same DC IP address per tarantino:

tarantino wrote:Fastimes68 was banned by arbcom, and 3 days later LGR shows up.

They both have done wiki business from the offices of Expert Choice, a company of 10-50 employees.

07:02 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@173-13-206-173-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Changing host]
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... =446691643 <- Fasttimes signing an ip edit

also,
15:37 -!- greenrosetta [~greenrose@c-98-204-58-89.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
[18:51] * Fasttimes68 (n=Fasttime@c-69-143-162-48.hsd1.va.comcast.net) Quit (Client Quit)

Could all be coincidences, but probably not.

Apparently from the same company. This thread has additional details on the Adams situation and the block of Fasttimes.

Unread post by **HRIP7** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:05 pm

Vigilant wrote:Looks like arbcom got there first. Indefinitely blocked with the arbcom label.

And a couple of socks

Gee, that was quick. What just happened?

Coming back to the article on the Analytical Hierarchy Process (T-H-L), this is the first time I have seen a Wikipedia article with an appendix (linked from an image caption) located on a talk space subpage ...

thekohser · Unread post by **thekohser** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:18 pm

DanMurphy wrote:So, again, what's going on?

Fasttimes68 was accused by a Playboy model of off-Wikipedia stalking/harassment. ArbCom seemed to agree that Fasttimes68's preoccupation with the model on-Wikipedia was unhealthy for everyone -- for Fasttimes68, for the model, and for the casual reader of Wikipedia. So, Fasttimes68 was banned.

Little green rosetta was sufficiently demonstrated to be the same person as Fasttimes68, so the "ban evasion" was sufficient grounds to block that account, too.

Wait three days, and the guy behind both of those accounts will likely return to Wikipedia.

This is an infinite cycle, I'll wager.

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:22 pm

thekohser wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:So, again, what's going on?
Fasttimes68 was accused by a Playboy model of off-Wikipedia stalking/harassment. ArbCom seemed to agree that Fasttimes68's preoccupation with the model on-Wikipedia was unhealthy for everyone -- for Fasttimes68, for the model, and for the casual reader of Wikipedia. So, Fasttimes68 was banned.

Little green rosetta was sufficiently demonstrated to be the same person as Fasttimes68, so the "ban evasion" was sufficient grounds to block that account, too.

Wait three days, and the guy behind both of those accounts will likely return to Wikipedia.

This is an infinite cycle, I'll wager.

Ah, so Arbcom privately came to the conclusion that the guy is a dangerous stalker (as in actual, physical stalking) and banned him in a star chamber-ike process. But can't acknowledge they've done this in public (on Wikipedia).

And what they really can't acknowledge is that (usually) each generation of socks from "banned" users gets a little more clever. All of their female editors and kiddie editors will be swimming in the pool with this "dangerous" (in their private estimate) man again very soon - they just won't know whom.

No matter. I'm sure he's a scream at children's parties.

Unread post by **HRIP7** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:22 pm

Vigilant wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... anie_Adams

Dollars to doughnuts, the guy behind LGR is the primary on the paid editor scandal at Stephanie Adams.

If he was, then it's a good thing he is now indefinitely blocked. The wars at the Adams biography went on for something like five years, with several bloggers who were in an off-wiki dispute with Adams (I think the matter went to court in one or two cases) repeatedly edit-warring with her over her biography.

That case was the main reason why I worked (that discussion is quite an interesting read, thanks to Will Beback) to get the following sentence into WP:BLP (T-H-L) policy in late 2011:

Individuals involved in a significant legal – or personal – dispute with the subject of any article covered by this policy are strongly discouraged from editing such articles, and are advised to use the article talk page or an appropriate Wikipedia noticeboard if they wish to raise concerns.

I would have gone a lot further than that – suggesting that such people should use a noticeboard rather than the biography talk page at the very least – but that was the most Wikipedians would support at the time. I discussed this with Newyorkbrad the other day, who said he would shortly propose a stronger wording in light of the Qworty scandal.

Of course, as this example shows, you can write anything you like into BLP policy. It doesn't really make that much of a difference if the same people just turn up again and again under anonymous handles. It's a bit like putting a padlock on the front door of a house that has gaping holes on all the other sides.

Randy from Boise · Unread post by **Randy from Boise** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:24 pm

thekohser wrote:
DanMurphy wrote:Not my area of expertise, but isn't like 40% or more of the USA on a comcast cable modem?
Depends on how you define the denominator of "the USA", but the numerator is 19,799,000 Comcast Internet service accounts. That includes probably about 19 million households, and about 800K businesses. I think there are about 115 million households and about 10 million businesses in the United States. So, the penetration rate is more like 16% than 40%. However, it's pretty safe to say that Comcast service is available to about 40% of the residential and business locations across the United States.

I get penetrated by Comcast once a month.

RfB

DanMurphy · Unread post by **DanMurphy** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:24 pm

HRIP7 wrote:
Vigilant wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?tit ... anie_Adams

Dollars to doughnuts, the guy behind LGR is the primary on the paid editor scandal at Stephanie Adams.
If he was, then it's a good thing he is now indefinitely blocked. The wars at the Adams biography went on for something like five years, with several bloggers who were in an off-wiki dispute with Adams (I think the matter went to court in one or two cases) repeatedly edit-warring with her over her biography.

That case was the main reason why I worked (that discussion is quite a n interesting read) to get the following sentence into WP:BLP (T-H-L) policy in late 2011:

Individuals involved in a significant legal – or personal – dispute with the subject of any article covered by this policy are strongly discouraged from editing such articles, and are advised to use the article talk page or an appropriate Wikipedia noticeboard if they wish to raise concerns.
I would have gone a lot further than that – suggesting that such people should use a noticeboard rather than the biography talk page at the very least – but that was the most Wikipedians would support at the time. I discussed this with Newyorkbrad the other day, who said he would shortly propose a stronger wording in light of the Qworty scandal.

Of course, as this example shows, you can write anything you like into BLP policy. It doesn't really make that much of a difference if the same people just turn up again and again. It's a bit like putting a padlock on the front door of a house that has gaping holes on all the other sides.

Wasn't the fact that Ashley Van Haeften got involved in negatively editing the Adam's biography after his sock change from "Ash" to "Fae" mentioned at his RFC? I think it was.

Unread post by **HRIP7** » Wed May 22, 2013 4:29 pm

DanMurphy wrote: Wasn't the fact that Ashley Van Haeften got involved in negatively editing the Adam's biography after his sock change from "Ash" to "Fae" mentioned at his RFC? I think it was.

I mainly remember his involvement in the Karrine Steffans (T-H-L) biography, where he linked a streaming porn site showing her having sex as an encyclopedic source.