The e-cigarette war

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
kołdry
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:57 pm

Because this will inevitably be mentioned, I am starting a thread. Dr. Heilman, whom you all know and love, is right in the center of it.

So, FergusM1970 (T-C-L) and TheNorlo (T-C-L), both deeply involved with the vaping scene (and possibly paid to perform advocacy), had been trying to add references to Electronic cigarette (T-H-L). And Heilman, who like many doctors wants to outlaw or regulate e-cigarettes (and that's a whole ugly little situation of its own), is fighting with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... _Doc_James

Heilman responds.....by "outing" one of them via Twitter posts. (As always, "outing" editors is NOTPERMITTED, unless it's a Wikipedia insider doing it.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... ig_editors

Which links to this charming little essay. It explains why Heilman is on the warpath.

http://vapemestoopid.co.uk/asshats-antz ... lls-oh-my/

FloNight gets involved.
Yesterday, when I followed the link in the talk page conversation where FergusM1970 was insulting User:Doc James, I was led to FergusM1970's twitter account where he advertises that he is a paid e-cig shill. To quote: "Veteran, vaper, writer and paid e-cigarette industry shill." And he links to where you can contact him to write. I followed the link and saw mention of Wikipedia work. I wrote to him by email to ask him about the situation and to give me a list of all of his Wikipedia accounts and all the articles that created or edited for hire. He gave me an initial list and then revised it a few times. FergusM1970 denied to me by email that he is paid to edit the e-cig article. And he changed the twitter profile to add "And yes, I know, some of you really ARE too fucking stupid to recognise sarcasm. Tough.Deal with it." after the bit that says he is a e-cig shill.

Since FergusM1970 is a tendentious editor on the topic of e-cigs, and I answered a RFC on that article talk page last month, I decided to pass the information to @ User:Nuclear Warfare (who has dealt with him in the past) for evaluation and further action. I've not heard back from him yet.

I woke up to see that this discussion was now on AN/I, and also I see that FergusM1970 is trying to remember all the articles that he wrote and list them on his user page. A good number of them were deleted for lack of notability which kind of shows the problem with doing this type of work. I regret to say that I don't think that FergusM1970 is the type of editor that fits in well on Wikipedia. He has been block numerous times for not understanding or following basic rules. Yet, he is soliciting work to edit Wikipedia articles. For that reason, I support a ban from editing Wikipedia entirely. And if is to return ever, I support a permanent ban from editing in all areas related to tobacco including e-cigs. Sydney Poore/FloNight♥♥♥♥ 16:12, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Then SandyGeorgia and other "Wikipedia Medical Foundation" supporters show up, and start tossing around accusations against FergusM. And it's getting remarkably ugly. Once again, a Wikipedia editor is "outed", this time by Dirk Beetstra:
I hope you don't mind adding to your header, User:SandyGeorgia. I came across this request on Elance, where "Wade" is looking for "... Someone with knowledge of the E cigs industry to write content for us for SEO purposes. ...". An assignment awarded to Fergus Mason. Adding this as evidence for both the abovementioned case, and for the suggested ban. --Dirk Beetstra T C 18:08, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Get out your vaporizers and take a long, deep hit before examining this.

Lukeno94
Gregarious
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:34 pm
Wikipedia User: Lukeno94

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Lukeno94 » Mon Dec 22, 2014 10:01 pm

The whole saga has been hilarious. It is one of the most frequent dramaboard-occupiers of late, and on what is a relatively insignificant topic that no-one should be getting that inflamed about.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Poetlister » Mon Dec 22, 2014 10:31 pm

It's important to the POV pushers. There could be a lot of money involved; smoking cessation aids such as nicotine-flavoured chewing gum are big business.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
JCM
Gregarious
Posts: 882
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2014 6:44 pm
Wikipedia User: John Carter
Location: Mars (duh)

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by JCM » Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:04 am

Poetlister wrote:It's important to the POV pushers. There could be a lot of money involved; smoking cessation aids such as nicotine-flavoured chewing gum are big business.
Wholehearted agreement. This, like quite a few other incidents, isn't about encyclopedic quality, or fairness, or accuracy, but money. Landmark Worldwide (T-H-L) is probably another very good example of such topics.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Cla68 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:19 am

Doc James is one of the nastiest POV pushers on WP. He's right up there with the global warmists and the atheist cabal. He openly uses WP to push his personal agenda. However, because his personal agenda usually meets the house POV, he doesn't get in trouble. If WP's established editors weren't so hell-bent on pushing their half-baked, myopic philosophies on everything, the paid shills for those various industries would probably be more willing to compromise and follow WP's policies. But, since WP's various environmentalist, "pro-science", anti- religtious cabals are so openly coddled, it polarizes other partisan editors who show up to try to balance things out, resulting in unnecessary civil wars.

Lukeno94
Gregarious
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:34 pm
Wikipedia User: Lukeno94

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Lukeno94 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:29 pm

Don't have any sympathy for FergusM1970 myself; lying about paid editing whilst causing that many problems is a big no-no, regardless of who he was fighting against (and as far as I can see, Doc James didn't even vote on the community ban, only a topic ban). Particularly if they are as much of a twat off-Wiki as people seem to be suggesting.

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Jim » Tue Dec 23, 2014 3:45 pm

Lukeno94 wrote:Don't have any sympathy for FergusM1970 myself; lying about paid editing whilst causing that many problems is a big no-no, regardless of who he was fighting against (and as far as I can see, Doc James didn't even vote on the community ban, only a topic ban). Particularly if they are as much of a twat off-Wiki as people seem to be suggesting.
It's certainly one of the funniest ANI threads I saw for a while:
No, I didn't do any of that.

Ok, I did a bit, but I hate you all. You shouldn't have googled me - bastards.

Ok, you caught me, I did it all, but I don't care if you ban me. Bastards.

...
2000 words about why I don't care if you ban me, and did I mention you are googling bastards?
...

We're banning you.

Well, could I just do punctuation and grammar? Please?

Ok - I don't care if you ban me...

rinse/repeat
He might wanna work on that approach for his next account.

User avatar
tarantino
Habitué
Posts: 4697
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:19 pm

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by tarantino » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:23 pm

Lukeno94 wrote:Don't have any sympathy for FergusM1970 myself;
FergusM1970's real name is posted, and an account from another website is linked to on ANI, contrary to Wikipedia's harrassment policy.
Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person had voluntarily posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia. Personal information includes legal name, date of birth, identification numbers, home or workplace address, job title and work organisation, telephone number, email address, other contact information (including any other accounts on any other web sites), or photograph whether any such information is accurate or not. Posting such information about another editor is an unjustifiable and uninvited invasion of privacy and may place that editor at risk of harm outside of their activities on Wikipedia. This applies to the personal information of both editors and non-editors. Any edit that "outs" someone must be reverted promptly, followed by a request for oversight to delete that edit from Wikipedia permanently.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:54 pm

tarantino wrote:
Lukeno94 wrote:Don't have any sympathy for FergusM1970 myself;
FergusM1970's real name is posted, and an account from another website is linked to on ANI, contrary to Wikipedia's harrassment policy.
Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person had voluntarily posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia. Personal information includes legal name, date of birth, identification numbers, home or workplace address, job title and work organisation, telephone number, email address, other contact information (including any other accounts on any other web sites), or photograph whether any such information is accurate or not. Posting such information about another editor is an unjustifiable and uninvited invasion of privacy and may place that editor at risk of harm outside of their activities on Wikipedia. This applies to the personal information of both editors and non-editors. Any edit that "outs" someone must be reverted promptly, followed by a request for oversight to delete that edit from Wikipedia permanently.
Thing is, if they ban him, then he's no longer "another editor". He is a "banned spammer", and so the protection no longer applies.

:blink:
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Zoloft » Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:59 pm

FergusM1970 is now a member of our humble forum.

I will direct them to this topic.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:17 pm

Hello everyone. Hope you all enjoyed the drama.

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Zoloft » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:20 pm

FergusM1970 wrote:Hello everyone. Hope you all enjoyed the drama.
:welcome:
You're quite prompt.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:23 pm

thekohser wrote:
tarantino wrote:
Lukeno94 wrote:Don't have any sympathy for FergusM1970 myself;
Thing is, if they ban him, then he's no longer "another editor". He is a "banned spammer", and so the protection no longer applies.

:blink:
The problem is, of course, that to ban me they had to violate the policy. Anyway here's my quick summary:

- I honestly didn't know about the disclosure rule (who really has time to plough through all the rules, and what's the point when they all boil down to "The rule is what the most involved admin says it is"?) When I found out about it I began adding the paid edits I'd done, except:

- One really embarrassing one, when I was hired to "protect" the reputation of a company that it eventually became clear was nearly as bad as the article said. I'm not disputing the decision to ban me for hiding it. In fact they'd have been justified in banning me even if I hadn't tried to hide it, because while paid editing is allowed paid advocacy isn't.

- The real driver for this was Doc James, who's a serial reporter of anyone who disagrees with his POV on the e-cig article (which I was not paid to edit). He's determined to get his own way and will happily break rules to do it. Also he's incredibly stubborn and impossible to reason with.
Last edited by FergusM1970 on Tue Dec 23, 2014 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:24 pm

Zoloft wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:Hello everyone. Hope you all enjoyed the drama.
:welcome:
You're quite prompt.
Well, I'm online almost all day because - don't tell anyone this, OK? - I'm a freelance writer.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 8:18 pm

Lukeno94 wrote:Particularly if they are as much of a twat off-Wiki as people seem to be suggesting.
Nah, I'm a lovely guy really, as long as you don't try to fob me off with magical thinking. Then I can get a bit irate.

User avatar
Midsize Jake
Site Admin
Posts: 9872
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 11:10 pm
Wikipedia Review Member: Somey

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Midsize Jake » Tue Dec 23, 2014 8:26 pm

FergusM1970 wrote:Nah, I'm a lovely guy really, as long as you don't try to fob me off with magical thinking.
Upon a somewhat cursory examination of the situation, I'd say your key misstep here was in actually believing the "some of you" part of "some of you really ARE too stupid to recognise sarcasm." In a very real way, you engaged in some magical thinking of your own there.

I should hasten to point out that it's not entirely their fault that they have this problem with sarcasm - the so-called "irony epidemic" of the late 80's and early 90's never completely went away, after all, and still thrives on the (mostly) anonymous internet. The real problem The Faithful have now is a lack of discernment and appreciation for context - Wikipedia essentially trains this out of them, demanding that they take nearly everything at face value and put aside whatever critical thinking abilities they may have originally had in the face of angry, often emotional fellow users. This is apparently how one best appeals to the lowest-common-denominator (in terms of humor appreciation) in any potential Wikipedia dispute.

Anyway, welcome to Wikipediocracy! :)

User avatar
Writegeist
Contributor
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:27 pm
Wikipedia User: Writegeist

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Writegeist » Tue Dec 23, 2014 8:37 pm

FergusM1970 wrote:I'm a freelance writer.
$25 an hour?
FergusM1970 wrote:I'm a starving writer.
Fixed. And welcome to the land of the banned. :evilgrin:

Lukeno94
Gregarious
Posts: 710
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 4:34 pm
Wikipedia User: Lukeno94

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Lukeno94 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:10 pm

Or not... the banning closure was reverted as being premature.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:19 pm

Lukeno94 wrote:Or not... the banning closure was reverted as being premature.
Oh, I'll get banned. I have earned it and I don't even mind. What's intriguing me now is that after Heilman took down his claim to be an assistant professor at U Saskch he later changed it to say he's a clinical assistant professor at UBC. The source he cites has a list of CAPs - and he isn't on it. He's a clinical instructor. So I'm spending my last few hours fixing the user page and having some fun.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:34 pm

FergusM1970 wrote:- The real driver for this was Doc James, who's a serial reporter of anyone who disagrees with his POV on the e-cig article (which I was not paid to edit). He's determined to get his own way and will happily break rules to do it. Also he's incredibly stubborn and impossible to reason with.
This is why I started this thread -- we know Doc James very, very well. He is a remarkable asshole, so remarkable that I've written a bio about him for our "secret wiki".

I might also point out the ongoing attempts by local governments to ban vaping devices as if they were de-facto cigarettes. It's being fought by two groups, that few people are even aware of:

*The nonprofits that were set up by the 1998 consent decree that took a massive pile of money from the tobacco companies to fund anti-smoking groups.
*Not to mention secret lobbying by drug companies that market semi-useless aids like nicotine gum and patches. They don't want competition.

Right in the middle of it all is this guy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanton_Glantz

Having "slaughtered" the cigarette industry (he thinks), now he's going after e-cigs in his inimitable manic fashion. The irony is that he was such an extremist, he even opposed the consent decree. Now he's being funded by it ("the American Legacy Foundation Distinguished Professor of Tobacco Control"). He's Ralph Nader, and GM is literally paying him to shriek about how incredibly dangerous the Corvair is. That "irony epidemic" continues unabated.

It appears that paid editors (Afoxland (T-C-L), Mongoose64 (T-C-L)) created Glantz's article in 2007. This year it's been drawn into the editwar. I wonder how long it will take Glantz to show up on AN/I and start making "demands".

BTW, Fergus: beware of MastCell (T-C-L). He is a supporter of Doc James, an MD with a long and questionable history on Wikipedia, and even more arrogant.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:36 pm

Yeah, I've encountered MastCell before. He's a festering chancre of the first order. As for Glantz, I got warned off his article by the med cabal for BLP violations. Most of what I added consisted of his education record, which his supporters had mysteriously failed to put in. I'm sure the fact he has no medical qualifications had nothing to do with that omission.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:46 pm

FergusM1970 wrote:Hello everyone. Hope you all enjoyed the drama.
Are you kidding? I shared it with a paid editor I've known for many years, whom I happen to know is a vaporer -- we laughed together about it.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Wed Dec 24, 2014 12:14 am

thekohser wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:Hello everyone. Hope you all enjoyed the drama.
Are you kidding? I shared it with a paid editor I've known for many years, whom I happen to know is a vaporer -- we laughed together about it.
The amusing thing is Doc really seems to believe that he's going to be able to prove that every pro-vaping editor on there is either a paid editor or a meatpuppet of me. I can't help thinking he's in for a surprise. And of course the group of vapers I associate with didn't really know about the article until a few days ago, so some of them might pile in as well. He's going to find himself fighting a flood of both editors and evidence here.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Wed Dec 24, 2014 12:16 am

Writegeist wrote: $25 an hour?
Well, I didn't say I'd spend the whole hour writing for that much, did I? I prefer fixed-price jobs because I can budget more easily and it gives me an incentive to write faster, instead of prodding morons on Wikipedia.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Dec 24, 2014 1:33 am

FergusM1970 wrote:The amusing thing is Doc really seems to believe that he's going to be able to prove that every pro-vaping editor on there is either a paid editor or a meatpuppet of me. I can't help thinking he's in for a surprise. And of course the group of vapers I associate with didn't really know about the article until a few days ago, so some of them might pile in as well. He's going to find himself fighting a flood of both editors and evidence here.
Get as many helpers as you can. Show them where AN/I is, so they can speak up in your defense. Be prepared for Heilman to attempt to start more RFCs, and have your supporters ready to speak up when needed. Yes, it's tedious and dull and stupid. That is how Wikipedia "pretends to operate".

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Wed Dec 24, 2014 6:19 am

Heilman took a large chunk of Electronic cigarette (T-H-L) out and moved it to Safety of electronic cigarettes (T-H-L), and guess what, it's being editwarred into massive, long incoherence.

And famous asshole QuackGuru has been messing with it. Guess what: he's undoing the "edits made by a banned editor".
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =639316486

This little exchange is really "charming".
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =639427589

User avatar
eagle
Eagle
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by eagle » Wed Dec 24, 2014 9:02 am

FergusM1970 wrote:Hello everyone. Hope you all enjoyed the drama.
:welcome:
Regardless of your views on ecigarettes, nobody deserves abuse at ANI.

User avatar
Writegeist
Contributor
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2014 10:27 pm
Wikipedia User: Writegeist

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Writegeist » Wed Dec 24, 2014 9:03 am

FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote: $25 an hour?
Well, I didn't say I'd spend the whole hour writing for that much, did I?
"For that little" surely?
FergusM1970 wrote:MastCell . . . a festering chancre of the first order.
I like that MastCell has a brain. I like that he has a sense of humor. I like that he calls to account some of the hypocrites, assholes, bullies, liars and pompous pricks that infest the 'pedia. And I quote him here and there on my talk page. Dunno nuffink about Doc James though.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Wed Dec 24, 2014 9:38 am

EricBarbour wrote:Heilman took a large chunk of Electronic cigarette (T-H-L) out and moved it to Safety of electronic cigarettes (T-H-L), and guess what, it's being editwarred into massive, long incoherence.

And famous asshole QuackGuru has been messing with it. Guess what: he's undoing the "edits made by a banned editor".
From a professional point of view Quack is actually fascinating. Doc is a shit writer, but Quack is in a special needs class of his own. It's not just that either; he's almost completely unable to understand what he's writing or why anyone else objects to it. I've seen speculation that he's a sock of one of the other MED assholes, but I don't think so. He's almost certainly a meat puppet, possibly the retarded younger brother of one of them.

Cloudjpk, on the other hand, is certainly a sock.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Wed Dec 24, 2014 9:40 am

Writegeist wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:"For that little" surely?
*Shrugs* Getting writing work on the internet is very competitive. Half the competition are in Bangladesh or Nigeria. They'll write for pennies an hour. It fucks up pricing for everyone. They never get any repeat business, of course, but cheapskate clients can't see why they should pay a real writer a decent rate when they can hire a content farm in Calcutta for $1.50 an hour.

On the other hand one of the best freelancer writers I've seen online is a retired Squadron Leader in the Indian Air Force.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:16 pm

Writegeist wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:I like that MastCell has a brain. I like that he has a sense of humor. I like that he calls to account some of the hypocrites, assholes, bullies, liars and pompous pricks that infest the 'pedia. And I quote him here and there on my talk page. Dunno nuffink about Doc James though.
I've done some digging and it turns out that I actually met MastCell in real life two years ago. I have to say I found him very amusing and pleasant, and he was talking a lot of sense. He does seem to have a different personality on Wikipedia though. I suspect the platform brings out a bit of everyone's inner asshole, and when you're a complete asshole anyway (yes Doc, I mean you) the results aren't pretty.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Thu Dec 25, 2014 1:30 am

FergusM1970 wrote:From a professional point of view Quack is actually fascinating. Doc is a shit writer, but Quack is in a special needs class of his own. It's not just that either; he's almost completely unable to understand what he's writing or why anyone else objects to it. I've seen speculation that he's a sock of one of the other MED assholes, but I don't think so. He's almost certainly a meat puppet, possibly the retarded younger brother of one of them.
Search me. All of the principal Wikipedia critics have tried to unmask him, and failed.
Cloudjpk, on the other hand, is certainly a sock.
Practically guaranteed to be a Wikiproject Medicine ally.

User avatar
Vigilant
Sonny, I've got a whole theme park full of red delights for you.
Posts: 31490
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:16 pm
Wikipedia User: Vigilant
Wikipedia Review Member: Vigilant

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Vigilant » Thu Dec 25, 2014 2:03 am

FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:I like that MastCell has a brain. I like that he has a sense of humor. I like that he calls to account some of the hypocrites, assholes, bullies, liars and pompous pricks that infest the 'pedia. And I quote him here and there on my talk page. Dunno nuffink about Doc James though.
I've done some digging and it turns out that I actually met MastCell in real life two years ago. I have to say I found him very amusing and pleasant, and he was talking a lot of sense. He does seem to have a different personality on Wikipedia though. I suspect the platform brings out a bit of everyone's inner asshole, and when you're a complete asshole anyway (yes Doc, I mean you) the results aren't pretty.
Doc's a pink sock.

Risky click...
Hello, John. John, hello. You're the one soul I would come up here to collect myself.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Dec 25, 2014 2:51 am

FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:I like that MastCell has a brain. I like that he has a sense of humor. I like that he calls to account some of the hypocrites, assholes, bullies, liars and pompous pricks that infest the 'pedia. And I quote him here and there on my talk page. Dunno nuffink about Doc James though.
I've done some digging and it turns out that I actually met MastCell in real life two years ago. I have to say I found him very amusing and pleasant, and he was talking a lot of sense. He does seem to have a different personality on Wikipedia though. I suspect the platform brings out a bit of everyone's inner asshole, and when you're a complete asshole anyway (yes Doc, I mean you) the results aren't pretty.
The problem is that he has fallen into the trap that many of the established editors in WP have fallen into, and that's becoming emotionally invested in using WP (because of its high Google ranking) to socially engineer the western world according to the dictates of their own personal, socio-political philosophies. Once they find other like-minded people, they band together and, before they know it, their lives are revolving around getting their topics of interest on message and making sure they stay there. I suspect that if one checked MastCell's user contributions and admin log, it would be evident that he spends a lot of time on his employer's dime, as well as large amounts of his free time, fiddling with Wikipedia.

It's debatable as to whether he is being compensated to do so. I think he probably isn't. His motivation is trying to influence the minds of the rest of the English-speaking world to believe the things that he believes.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Thu Dec 25, 2014 3:33 am

Cla68 wrote:The problem is that he has fallen into the trap that many of the established editors in WP have fallen into, and that's becoming emotionally invested in using WP (because of its high Google ranking) to socially engineer the western world according to the dictates of their own personal, socio-political philosophies. Once they find other like-minded people, they band together and, before they know it, their lives are revolving around getting their topics of interest on message and making sure they stay there. I suspect that if one checked MastCell's user contributions and admin log, it would be evident that he spends a lot of time on his employer's dime, as well as large amounts of his free time, fiddling with Wikipedia.
Generally true, and the ultimate indicator that someone is an "insider". Almost every one that I've looked at was working on WP during their local business hours, repeatedly and heavily, for years. A few of them might have lost their jobs (I suspect Dangerous Panda is one of them) because of their WP fighting, but no one will ever admit this.

Cla68
Habitué
Posts: 2389
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:43 pm
Wikipedia User: Cla68

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Cla68 » Thu Dec 25, 2014 6:55 am

EricBarbour wrote:
Cla68 wrote:The problem is that he has fallen into the trap that many of the established editors in WP have fallen into, and that's becoming emotionally invested in using WP (because of its high Google ranking) to socially engineer the western world according to the dictates of their own personal, socio-political philosophies. Once they find other like-minded people, they band together and, before they know it, their lives are revolving around getting their topics of interest on message and making sure they stay there. I suspect that if one checked MastCell's user contributions and admin log, it would be evident that he spends a lot of time on his employer's dime, as well as large amounts of his free time, fiddling with Wikipedia.
Generally true, and the ultimate indicator that someone is an "insider". Almost every one that I've looked at was working on WP during their local business hours, repeatedly and heavily, for years. A few of them might have lost their jobs (I suspect Dangerous Panda is one of them) because of their WP fighting, but no one will ever admit this.
Getting an article on message is very time-consuming. The cabalists have to carefully structure the article to support their narrative. Because most visitors only read the intro, they have to put careful work into the lede. Then, they make their "Q & A" sections on the article talk pages that they use as justification to revert changes or additions to the article that they don't approve of. Finally, they build consensus against sources they don't like and chase away the contrary editors (like yours truly) who threaten to get in their way.

After all that time and effort, any article can be undone by a determined editor in only a few seconds, because of the way the wiki works. An editor, even an IP, can reverse the article back to an earlier version, remove large swaths of text, add new, unapproved information, or rewrite the intro, in a hundredth of the time it took the topics' cabals to get it the way they wanted it. The article's cabal know this, which is why they, or others in their group, have to check the article every few minutes, 24-hours a day, seven days a week, and quickly revert any changes before they can "stick." They have to do this for the rest of their lives.

Some of these cabalists continually check their watchlists even from their mobile phones when they're away from their home or work PCs. They are completely locked into a unending, precarious situation which affects their personal and professional lives. That may be one reason why editors like Doc James, MastCell, QuackGuru, RedPenofDoom, and others of these editors are so irascible and acerbic. They're trapped.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Thu Dec 25, 2014 8:18 am

Vigilant wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:Doc's a pink sock.

Risky click...
Yes, he certainly is.

EricBarbour
 
Posts: 10891
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:32 pm
Location: hell

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by EricBarbour » Thu Dec 25, 2014 10:36 am

Cla68 wrote:Some of these cabalists continually check their watchlists even from their mobile phones when they're away from their home or work PCs. They are completely locked into a unending, precarious situation which affects their personal and professional lives. That may be one reason why editors like Doc James, MastCell, QuackGuru, RedPenofDoom, and others of these editors are so irascible and acerbic. They're trapped.
They're bloody fools who trapped themselves. No one put guns to their heads, although sometimes money was involved.

TheNorlo
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:57 am
Wikipedia User: TheNorlo

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by TheNorlo » Sat Dec 27, 2014 5:12 am

Well, odds are that I'll be topic banned pretty soon.... So I guess you guys'll see me around. Getting tired of this shit.

FergusM1970
Contributor
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 6:52 pm
Wikipedia User: FergusM1970

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by FergusM1970 » Sat Dec 27, 2014 6:08 am

TheNorlo wrote:Well, odds are that I'll be topic banned pretty soon.... So I guess you guys'll see me around. Getting tired of this shit.
Hello and welcome!

User avatar
eagle
Eagle
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by eagle » Sat Dec 27, 2014 7:41 am

Welcome Norlo! What lessons have you learned about Wikipedia?
:welcome:

TheNorlo
Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:57 am
Wikipedia User: TheNorlo

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by TheNorlo » Sat Dec 27, 2014 2:26 pm

That you can't trust any controversial topics whatsoever. And that some dedicated assholes have way to much time on their hands bringing other people down.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by thekohser » Sat Dec 27, 2014 2:55 pm

TheNorlo wrote:That you can't trust any controversial topics whatsoever.
Believe me, you can't trust the non-controversial topics, either. When my daughter was 10 years old, she placed a completely fictional anecdote about a celebrity and a form of dance into a completely mundane Wikipedia article. That was about four months ago, and the article's been viewed close to 8,000 times. Nobody's fixed it. And the fiction has been copied on 28 other "scraper" websites.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
eagle
Eagle
Posts: 1254
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 12:26 pm

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by eagle » Sat Dec 27, 2014 6:02 pm

thekohser wrote:When my daughter was 10 years old, she placed a completely fictional anecdote about a celebrity and a form of dance into a completely mundane Wikipedia article. That was about four months ago, and the article's been viewed close to 8,000 times. Nobody's fixed it. And the fiction has been copied on 28 other "scraper" websites.
Glad to learn that the next generation of Wikipedia critics is being trained and our work will continue after our passing.
:welcome: Ms. Kohs

User avatar
TungstenCarbide
Habitué
Posts: 2592
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:51 am
Wikipedia User: TungstenCarbide
Wikipedia Review Member: TungstenCarbide

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by TungstenCarbide » Sat Dec 27, 2014 6:06 pm

thekohser wrote:
TheNorlo wrote:That you can't trust any controversial topics whatsoever.
Believe me, you can't trust the non-controversial topics, either. When my daughter was 10 years old, she placed a completely fictional anecdote about a celebrity and a form of dance into a completely mundane Wikipedia article. That was about four months ago, and the article's been viewed close to 8,000 times. Nobody's fixed it. And the fiction has been copied on 28 other "scraper" websites.
That sounds like a great exercise for young students.
Gone hiking. also, beware of women with crazy head gear and a dagger.

User avatar
Johnny Au
Habitué
Posts: 2618
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:05 pm
Wikipedia User: Johnny Au
Actual Name: Johnny Au
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Johnny Au » Sun Dec 28, 2014 2:19 am

TungstenCarbide wrote:
thekohser wrote:
TheNorlo wrote:That you can't trust any controversial topics whatsoever.
Believe me, you can't trust the non-controversial topics, either. When my daughter was 10 years old, she placed a completely fictional anecdote about a celebrity and a form of dance into a completely mundane Wikipedia article. That was about four months ago, and the article's been viewed close to 8,000 times. Nobody's fixed it. And the fiction has been copied on 28 other "scraper" websites.
That sounds like a great exercise for young students.
It would be a great way to learn about the Bicholim Conflict.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by thekohser » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:09 pm

EricBarbour wrote:Because this will inevitably be mentioned, I am starting a thread. Dr. Heilman, whom you all know and love, is right in the center of it.

So, FergusM1970 (T-C-L) and TheNorlo (T-C-L), both deeply involved with the vaping scene (and possibly paid to perform advocacy),
Eric, it looks like you scooped The Signpost a few months before they finally caught on. Congrats, and thank you for helping to make Wikipediocracy the news leader for Wikipedia-related news.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:13 pm

Lukeno94 wrote:The whole saga has been hilarious. It is one of the most frequent dramaboard-occupiers of late, and on what is a relatively insignificant topic that no-one should be getting that inflamed about.
Oh, I see what you did there...

RfB

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12083
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Thu Mar 05, 2015 11:23 pm

FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:
FergusM1970 wrote:
Writegeist wrote:"For that little" surely?
*Shrugs* Getting writing work on the internet is very competitive. Half the competition are in Bangladesh or Nigeria. They'll write for pennies an hour. It fucks up pricing for everyone. They never get any repeat business, of course, but cheapskate clients can't see why they should pay a real writer a decent rate when they can hire a content farm in Calcutta for $1.50 an hour.

On the other hand one of the best freelancer writers I've seen online is a retired Squadron Leader in the Indian Air Force.
Yeah, I was gonna mention that, now venturing into my first "paid editing" task as I am. There are a plethora of wannabe paid Wikipedians from the developing world willing to work for $5 an hour or less.

I actually hired a Finnish woman living in South Africa at that rate to do a couple lightweight translations for me. It's a real thing. She was happy for the work and I don't doubt that she overbilled me for time actually spent — which is fine, I suppose.

I listed myself at $20/hr. which isn't a living wage if anyone actually had to freelance for rent at that rate but is in the top quarter of advertising WP writers on oDesk, I think. I'm actually "working" for a small fraction of that, billing 1 or 2 hours for multiple hours work, doing this for the principle and the experience gained rather than the money...

RfB

P.S. Full story coming eventually to a blog near you.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: The e-cigarette war

Unread post by thekohser » Sun Sep 13, 2015 4:53 pm

thekohser wrote:Believe me, you can't trust the non-controversial topics, either. When my daughter was 10 years old, she placed a completely fictional anecdote about a celebrity and a form of dance into a completely mundane Wikipedia article. That was about four months ago, and the article's been viewed close to 8,000 times. Nobody's fixed it. And the fiction has been copied on 28 other "scraper" websites.
Still going strong, more than a year later. And in August 2015 a small town's local arts center hosted a festival featuring the dance, and their web site repeated the Wikipedia fiction (not "word for word", either, so a real human read Wikipedia's falsehood, believed it, rewrote it, and disseminated it further). My kid was thrilled at how easy it is to spread digital misinformation, and it's a great lesson for her to understand the difference between anonymous scholarship and traditional scholarship. About 60 Wikipedia page views per day (or 23,000 thus far), and nobody has noticed or cared enough to remove it.

:always:
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

Post Reply