Wikipediocracy

Documented here in depth.

Daniel Giles Shimmin is a childhood friend of James Forrester that Forrester knew through computer gaming.
Forrestor actively protected Shimmin's Demiurge1000 (T-C-L)'s account.
Shimmin was eventually SanFranBanned for child engangerment and grooming issues which we also documented here on WO.

Why is Forrester still employed by the WMF?

He breached his duty as an employee of the foundation by knowingly protecting a pedophile in the face of incontrovertible evidence.

Why doesn't the WMF give a shit about the harm to the children that Forrester enabled through his affirmative defense of this pedophile Shimmin?

What the fuck is wrong with you people?

Frankly Forrester is a dipshit and he always has been. He never should have been hired in the first place (along with several others including James Alexander).

I can't explain why he's still employed now though other than what I have said before. For all their words and statements the WMF really doesn't give 2 shits about the community. But really, this shouldn't shock anyone here.

Unless something has changed, this posting should be in the "Wikipedians too embarrassing for public viewing" section, methinks.

Maybe Vigilant can remove his initial comment?

Moral Hazard wrote:Unless something has changed, this posting should be in the "Wikipedians too embarrassing for public viewing" section, methinks.

Maybe Vigilant can remove his initial comment?

I disagree.

He's a paid, senior employee of the WMF and this needs a light shined on it.

Moral Hazard wrote:Unless something has changed, this posting should be in the "Wikipedians too embarrassing for public viewing" section, methinks.

Probably.

The way we left this in the other thread (which is in that forum and therefore requires registration to view) is that maybe this could be made into a blog post, if someone can state the whole business in a way that makes sense to the general public. But so far I don't think we've come across anything substantive to back up the assertion that Forrester really did actively protect Demiurge1000 (T-C-L) (or if we have, I haven't seen it), and without that, all we really have is guilt by association.

Maybe what we could do is redact Demiurge's real name from this thread, but then leave it out there to see if that motivates someone to remember a relevant incident of some kind...? Preferably something that could be archived, cited and linked to?

ArbCom allows a pedophile I've read about, and which I've alerted them to for that matter, to continue editing. Same with the WMF, I had also alerted them to two or three pedophiles on Wikipedia (one I had already reported to ArbCom, and the second one I hadn't - I think I also reported a third one to them). The Wikipedia community is utterly terrible when it comes to child protection in general. I cannot wait for the day something like the BBC reports on this, because that would appear to be the only way to change things.

Only just caught up with this - Demiurge's identity wasnt a secret. He was globally banned a couple of months after a number of editors (who shall remain nameless *cough*) starting making complaints to the WMF and his local police station in tandem.

Generally if you want the WMF to take issue over a safeguarding action, copy them in on email reports to the police and see what happens

Anroth wrote:Only just caught up with this - Demiurge's identity wasnt a secret. He was globally banned a couple of months after a number of editors (who shall remain nameless *cough*) starting making complaints to the WMF and his local police station in tandem.

Generally if you want the WMF to take issue over a safeguarding action, copy them in on email reports to the police and see what happens

Spill.

Vigilant wrote:

Anroth wrote:Only just caught up with this - Demiurge's identity wasnt a secret. He was globally banned a couple of months after a number of editors (who shall remain nameless *cough*) starting making complaints to the WMF and his local police station in tandem.

Generally if you want the WMF to take issue over a safeguarding action, copy them in on email reports to the police and see what happens

Spill.

Exactly as I said tbh, no real drama. Once it was clear Arbcom were actively protecting Demiurge1000 and after numerous reports to the WMF about the clear and obvious grooming going on (you are probably familiar with most problematic from here but Kiefer could probably provide more examples and the details of the early complaints), it was fairly obvious that from a purely safeguarding point of view something had to be done off-wiki. I know at least two editors (beside myself, and incidentally neither was Kiefer, but I wouldnt be surprised if he did something either) who saw the intentional and deliberate attempts to communicate with a minor despite that minor's parent's wishes as well in scope of needing official action.

In my case mostly because I am involved in running/admin a number of game-related communities that have young children participating so I am used to having to deal with all sorts of problem people. Usually in the form of a swift and unhesitant ban stick, but if we know the identity of the person we a)warn the parents, b)warn the person in no uncertain terms what will happen if they continue, and c)(if it continues) notify the police.

Fortunately the UK police etc have become much more pro-active in the last ten years on grooming. Especially online. While at the time I dont recall any specific laws (we now have stuff like this the police were certainly happy to receive reports....

I have no idea if it was just the volume of complaints to the WMF that finally got through, or it was the fact that people were getting concerned enough to go to the police and the WMF wanted to avoid being accused of a coverup (ha, turns out at least one of their employees was) or they did actually get a query from the police that tipped it. It could have been just co-incidence he was banned when he was.

I do know when I asked an ex-arb member who I trust what they had heard, it was precisely zero. So I suspect it was getting squelched both by arbcom and the WMF at the time, and only when it threatened to get more public was action taken. The WMF as we know is a highly reactionary body.

Excellent.

I should make it clear I had no idea of the Forrester connection, and I dont think anyone else did at the time. But it probably does explain why the WMF was being remarkably slow-moving. But then again, its always been slow-moving when it *should* do something until its forced to. I know I just assumed it was their usual heel-dragging, so I wouldnt be surprised if everyone else did too.

As I said in the non-public thread, this could be quite a blog post. As Jake said, however, there needs to be some more confirmation about this connection(in addition to written in laymen terms). Maybe some brave WMF staffer(current or former) could even anonymously confirm this for the post.

Good work, Anroth.

There's a certain media outlet what might be interested...

Daily Mail wrote:HAVE YOU BEEN WRONGED BY WIKIPEDIA?
If so, please tell us your story by sending an email to wikistories@dailymail.co.uk

Probably best coming from someone else, but wouldn't hurt to drop 'em an email or two.

If that address defunct, try: letters@dailymail.co.uk

As I have mentioned before, one of our UK members declared having an obligation under UK law to notify appropriate authorities and then did alert at least one authority.

I never received any further information, to my knowledge.

I sounds like the easiest way to get an answer is for James Forrester to answer a couple of simple questions:

1) How do you know Daniel Shimmin?
2) Were you aware that Daniel Shimmin was Demiurge1000?
3) At what time were you aware of Daniel Shimmin being Demiurge1000?
4) Were you aware that Demiurge1000 was grooming children on en.wp?
5) At what time were you aware that Demiurge1000 was grooming children on en.wp?
6) Did you ever intervene on Daniel Shimmin's behalf?
7) When, why and under what circumstances did you intervene on Daniel Shimmin's behalf?
8) Did you intervene on Daniel Shimmin's behalf under the color of authority of your position at the WMF?

WMF's legal counsel should have already asked James Forrester these and other questions...

Edit update:
9) Who else at the WMF was aware of the Daniel Shimmin/Demiurge1000 connection and who else intervened on his behalf.

I suspect strongly that there are others at the WMF who share some liability with Forrester...

Although 3 through 8 all rather depend on the answer to 2, do they not I don't know the case history enough as to whether it's something the dogs in the street all know.

Midsize Jake wrote: so far I don't think we've come across anything substantive to back up the assertion that Alexander really did actively protect Demiurge1000 (T-C-L) (or if we have, I haven't seen it), and without that, all we really have is guilt by association.

I had also confused James Alexander and James Forrester.

James Alexander had a forum thread, upon his leaving the WMF for Twitter:
viewtopic.php?p=231677#p231677

Moral Hazard wrote:

Midsize Jake wrote: so far I don't think we've come across anything substantive to back up the assertion that Alexander really did actively protect Demiurge1000 (T-C-L) (or if we have, I haven't seen it), and without that, all we really have is guilt by association.

I had also confused James Alexander and James Forrester.

James Alexander had a forum thread, upon his leaving the WMF for Twitter:
viewtopic.php?p=231677#p231677

Yeah. I've had to watch my typing around this topic because I've made the same mistake around the names and then had to go back and correct it.

Here's the triptych for identifying shitty WMF employees named James:

1) James Forrester, soft mouthed pedophile enabler. 2) James Alexander, dipshit who refused to get rid of an alleged rapist from Trust and Safety
When you've got so many malign, incompetent dipshits in the WMF, it's easy to get them confused.

The pair of em makes me think "brother from another mother" shit

Same smarming, supercilious smirk, a well-fed look of self-entitlement.

C&B wrote:The pair of em makes me think "brother from another mother" shit

Same smarming, supercilious smirk, a well-fed look of self-entitlement.

Same litter.

Meow

If anyone is interested, the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire has a piece on what happens when people groom online. Which illustrates why you have to be eternally... vigilant

Granted its overly sensational (as is the usual case for VicDerby stuff) and it paints Roblox in a much worse light than it is. Its actually a great game for children and the things listed are a rare occurance.

Vigilant wrote:

C&B wrote:The pair of em makes me think "brother from another mother" shit

Same smarming, supercilious smirk, a well-fed look of self-entitlement.

Same litter.

Remind me not to play "spot the difference" with you again, Vigilant ha!

Forrester shouldn't mind a few questions. We know how deeply committed he is to "transparency", "engagement", and "reform".

At least, he was in 2010:

James D. Forrester
Transparency & Digital Engagement | Efficiency and Reform Group | Cabinet Office
020 7276 5589 | 3rd Floor, 22 Whitehall, London SW1A 2WH

Anroth wrote:Meow

If anyone is interested, the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire has a piece on what happens when people groom online. Which illustrates why you have to be eternally... vigilant

Granted its overly sensational (as is the usual case for VicDerby stuff) and it paints Roblox in a much worse light than it is. Its actually a great game for children and the things listed are a rare occurance.

That was a very hard read.

'Life-destroying'

But according to both Sarah and Iain, more needs to be done to protect children.

Sarah says her son is still "in a very bad way".

"He's broken, and so are we. It's life-destroying," she says.

"I'll never be able to take those pictures and words out of my mind."

This is the shit you're enabling, James Forrester, by protecting sexual predators like Daniel Shimmin.
You've got a lot to answer for, you fat little shit.

I don't understand the confusion. Obviously different people.

C&B wrote:Same smarming, supercilious smirk, a well-fed look of self-entitlement.

That probably helps or helped them to fit in with the WMF culture.

I notice James is no longer a product owner but is now a software engineer on the latest staff list. Is that a downgrade do you think and what was the reason for the change? His user page says it happened in 2018 - which shows how much attention I pay to anything.

After such successful endeavours as the Visual Editor, he's still the "I'm the expert" team leader.
Ever wondered why the WMF creates failed project after failed project? You're looking at the right person.

spartaz wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:41 pm

I notice James is no longer a product owner but is now a software engineer on the latest staff list. Is that a downgrade do you think and what was the reason for the change? His user page says it happened in 2018 - which shows how much attention I pay to anything.

Other than being invited to develop his career elsewhere, I can't think of a downgrade that would make much difference. Some stuff from the WMF works well enough, but I doubt that he can claim much of the credit for it.