Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
User avatar
WWHP
Sucks
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:31 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by WWHP » Fri Dec 24, 2021 7:33 am

Jake Is A Sellout wrote:
Tue Dec 21, 2021 9:19 pm
I replied to you WWHP, but rog deleted it. :cry:

You know him as Smiley on Wikipediocracy.

Hopefully his "Uncle Eric" will be a dear and provide you with a copy. :shrug:
Hi. Not sure who this is?

Well I did have a straight confrontation with Wikipediocracy. I am not sure how many here saw, but I also had a follow up conversation with them, quite confrontational. I discovered a discussion they had a few years back about the Smiths, this was Zoloft and Midsize, a lot of them. They were acting all shocked and disgusted about that type of behavior on the thread, and Michael Suerez confronted them to the fact that I presented the evidence to them years ago, when they participated in the Smith misinformation and harassment campaign.

They really do not handle professional confrontation very well. I am now banned.

Case closed, that place is a troll farm.

Anyway, if would love to show experience, disgruntled Wikipedia editors how Aiki Wiki works, hit me up if anyone is interested.

Cheers, merry christmas, happy holidays, etc

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 3108
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 389 times
Been thanked: 692 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by ericbarbour » Fri Dec 24, 2021 8:07 pm

WWHP wrote:
Fri Dec 24, 2021 7:33 am
Jake Is A Sellout wrote:
Tue Dec 21, 2021 9:19 pm
I replied to you WWHP, but rog deleted it. :cry:
You know him as Smiley on Wikipediocracy.
Hopefully his "Uncle Eric" will be a dear and provide you with a copy. :shrug:
Hi. Not sure who this is?
He won't tell you, but he was "Crow's Nest" on Wikipediocracy. From which he was banned. Like almost everyone else (other than Wikipedia admins and arbitrators). I forget all the sock accounts he used on Wikipedia itself. "MIck MacNee" was the most prominent one most people remember. Heavily involved in the stupid "British Isles" editwar, which continues to this day.
Well I did have a straight confrontation with Wikipediocracy. I am not sure how many here saw, but I also had a follow up conversation with them, quite confrontational. I discovered a discussion they had a few years back about the Smiths, this was Zoloft and Midsize, a lot of them. They were acting all shocked and disgusted about that type of behavior on the thread, and Michael Suerez confronted them to the fact that I presented the evidence to them years ago, when they participated in the Smith misinformation and harassment campaign.
Yes, Wikipediocracy started out okay, with the most prominent WP critics involved. But in 2015 there was some kind of bizarre "coup d'etat" in which Zoloft and Tarantino, with the silent assent of Somey/Jake, forced most of the others out. As it turned out, Zoloft is William "Stanistani" Burns, Wikipedia fanboy and editor (and failed Arbcom candidate in 2013) who thinks Wikipedia has problems. But he doesn't want people to be "mean" to each other. So they tossed the "hardened critics" and anyone who might "dox" the poor little Wikipedians, and started inviting WP admins. Some showed up, most still think Wikipediocracy is a "forum for banned users" and a "doxxing forum" that should be destroyed. No matter what the old fool Zoloft thinks, most WP insiders are still abusive little dictators and sociopaths. And hypocrites as well. Most still hate him for running that bloody forum. There are NO WORDS for the sheer arrogance, stupidity, selfishness and evil plotting that Wikipedians undertake every day, to silence anyone criticizing THEM.

Wikipediocracy did the bastards a FAVOR, by publicizing their internal scandals. Like Qworty, Tenebrae/Frank Lovece, Wifione, Arnnon Geshuri, the ludicrous attempt to purge Dr. Heilman from the WMF Board (which led to the later purge of WMF director Lila Tretikov). And many others. The supply of wiki-scandals is infinite. But Wikipedians are tiny Hitlers who obsessively resent anyone telling them how their little playground is failing.
They really do not handle professional confrontation very well. I am now banned.

Case closed, that place is a troll farm.
Our moderator Strelnikov has a blog where he tried to keep track of this petty nonsense. Note that some of the links are outdated and went to the early version of this forum on boards.net, which some Wikipediot managed to get deleted for bogus "terms of service violation". They can't shut THIS forum down because a customer of mine is running it on a commercial account.

Isn't it just amazing how much Wikipediocracy now resembles Wikipedia itself?
https://wikipedia-sucks-badly.blogspot. ... today.html
-----
путин грязная маленькая шлюха

User avatar
WWHP
Sucks
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:31 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by WWHP » Sat Dec 25, 2021 12:55 am

ericbarbour wrote:
Fri Dec 24, 2021 8:07 pm
No matter what the old fool Zoloft thinks, most WP insiders are still abusive little dictators and sociopaths. And hypocrites as well. Most still hate him for running that bloody forum. There are NO WORDS for the sheer arrogance, stupidity, selfishness and evil plotting that Wikipedians undertake every day, to silence anyone criticizing THEM.
I have a theory about this. I gave Wikipediocracy numerous opportunities over the years to just be professional. From the first time I arrived, finding myself doxxed there, to the most recent. It's the same trolling and for the life of me I was having a hard time understanding how they could not even see their own behavior.

What they apply on the forum there, I realized, is the same tactic applied on Wikipedia to flag a new editor and get them banned. The pattern is needle the poster whom you do not want around. needle them again. Get them frustrated. Laugh at their frustration. Wait until finally they say something out of frustration, use that as some sort of infraction to get them sanctioned, removed, etc.

On Wikipedia, there is a payoff for that. On a discussion forum, there isn't. They learned how to bully on Wikipedia, and have a massive blind spot to how that reads to a third party.

They are living in a bubble about this. The entire community supports and sanctions misinformation and harassment, they just don't see it as misinformation and harassment because they are doing it.

A troll farm is still a troll farm.


Our moderator Strelnikov has a blog where he tried to keep track of this petty nonsense. Note that some of the links are outdated and went to the early version of this forum on boards.net, which some Wikipediot managed to get deleted for bogus "terms of service violation". They can't shut THIS forum down because a customer of mine is running it on a commercial account.

Isn't it just amazing how much Wikipediocracy now resembles Wikipedia itself?
https://wikipedia-sucks-badly.blogspot. ... today.html
I just caught his blog! Serendipity, he blogged about the skeptics on Wikipedia just a few days ago. Over-all his post did a fair job but one or two clarities were missing.

Editor Vzaak and Editor Manul are the SAME editing account. I finally tracked down the trail of how this happened. Manul changed the account name, I followed the trail, they had to get permission. Vzaak got a lot of heat from WWHP. the name change to "manul" was brilliant media strategy. Try searching for "manul" on the internet, as one of the most populated words on internet search is "manual".

In their minds, they are fighting misinformation. Problem is, they use misinformation to fight misinformation, making them just another troll farm too.

While I do not have solid proof, it is consistent that this account is Tim Farley. The original media operation I caught them conducting is one of the reasons I took on Sheldrake's BLP problem.

It was an orchestrated online polemic tit for tat between Professor Jerry Coyne and Rupert Sheldrake across of few publications, the BBC and the Atlantic I believe. The trail stops with Jerry Coyne, continued with Tim Farley, connected by Wikipedia editing accounts Vzaak and later Manul, and followed by the Smith troll farm on Wikipedia along with a few others.

User avatar
WWHP
Sucks
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:31 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by WWHP » Sat Dec 25, 2021 12:57 am

also, Merry Christmas everyone! About to spend it with my son. Thinking about getting him drunk for the first time, hehe.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 3108
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 389 times
Been thanked: 692 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by ericbarbour » Sat Dec 25, 2021 1:15 am

WWHP wrote:
Sat Dec 25, 2021 12:55 am
What they apply on the forum there, I realized, is the same tactic applied on Wikipedia to flag a new editor and get them banned. The pattern is needle the poster whom you do not want around. needle them again. Get them frustrated. Laugh at their frustration. Wait until finally they say something out of frustration, use that as some sort of infraction to get them sanctioned, removed, etc.

On Wikipedia, there is a payoff for that. On a discussion forum, there isn't. They learned how to bully on Wikipedia, and have a massive blind spot to how that reads to a third party.

They are living in a bubble about this. The entire community supports and sanctions misinformation and harassment, they just don't see it as misinformation and harassment because they are doing it.
You are correct. They do rotten things, accuse their opponents of doing the same rotten things, and invent "reasons" to ban them.

If there was "truth in advertising" Wikipedia would carry a disclaimer on every page, saying something like "Wikipedia is NOT a reliable source for information. Any information seen on Wikipedia may be biased or incorrect. Also, its administrative bureaucracy is dishonest, hypocritical, and untrustworthy".

And a pleasant holiday to all. Maybe I should sleep the whole day tomorrow.
-----
путин грязная маленькая шлюха

User avatar
Dysklyver
Sucks Critic
Posts: 387
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:14 am
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 14 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by Dysklyver » Mon Dec 27, 2021 6:09 pm

WWHP wrote:
Fri Dec 24, 2021 7:33 am
Well I did have a straight confrontation with Wikipediocracy.
Unfortunately, despite receiving a notification on WPO, this thread only just now came to my attention because I don't use the internet enough these days to receive timely updates. The WPO thread is currently locked, nevertheless I would like to respond to what you directed at me specifically in your WPO post dated Dec 21, 2021.
WWHP wrote:You're a rationalwiki editor right? You are aware of Oliver, right? Well because you are a rationalwiki editor, and you know Oliver, and I know you know who I am, I am holding YOU personally responsible for that article about me on that platform.

You know that is wrong, why don't you change the article? Why dont you ask for it to be removed?

Do you support rationalwiki conducting harassment and misinformation campaign against personal targets?

Apparently, you do
There are several questions here. Firstly to "You're a rationalwiki editor right?" I can confirm that I was a RationalWiki Editor prior to April 2021 with the usernames D and Judge Dredd. However, I am no longer involved with that project.

Secondly, to "You are aware of Oliver, right?" I can confirm that I most certainly am, since I was the one who banned him from RationalWiki in the first place, I have furthermore suffered substantial interactions with him on multiple boards where I have commented on his antics extensively.

You wrote; "You know that is wrong, why don't you change the article? Why dont you ask for it to be removed?" and to that I will simply say this, your article was a low priority, hidden among the countless other hit pieces written by the same author. When I failed to gain the upper hand on the author, the articles survived unscathed.

To give some context. When I was elected to the RationalWiki Board of Trustees in 2020 I quickly discovered that nobody actually runs the website, the owner, Trent Toulouse, logs on twice a year to collect donations and pay the hosting service. Every so often David Gerard organises someone to update the website software on an ad-hoc basis without board involvement. The main email contact for the foundation is generally not read, and there is no internal communication regarding any mails received, most of which are binned, assuming the email address you are using even receives mail at all, which they normally don't due to being broken. The foundation website was last maintained by a now banned user. The board has forgotten to file critical legal documents so many times that there is a backlog reaching back to 2013 and it's questionable if the board will ever catch up given that they meet twice a year for an hour and all board matters are conducted in that time.

A short time after I joined the RationalWiki Board of Trustees, I became involved in a high level dispute with the community regarding my decision to unilaterally exploit a configuration error in the edit filter, to check the IP addresses for all suspected sockpuppets of Oliver D. Smith, Michael Coombs, and Abd ul-Rahman Lomax. This exercise was inspired by Abd giving me a large amount of behavioural analysis on Smith, asserting that Smith was operating a "good hand, bad hand" approach where the bad hand was an impersonation of one of his enemies. I found through technical analysis that this appeared to be true, the majority of blocked accounts attributed to Abd, Mike, and Smith were infact all operated by the same person. Smith had also impersonated several other people he'd written about on the site, resulting in them getting banned, thus pre-emptively closing a means of complaining about his articles.

The majority of the board was not amused by this exercise, and unanimously voted to remove me from the board at the beginning of their next meeting, citing misuse of technical access to user data. I was also forced to give up the 'tech' role and thus lost sysadmin access to the site, resulting in Smith resuming activity. I thereupon became involved in an action to ban formally Smith and Abd from RationalWiki, this succeeded, but it gave Smith a forum to air opinions and he was successfully able to influence other editors to informally ban me shortly after. Smith himself is still actively maintaining his articles with an army of new sockpuppets. In the meantime I stopped bothering, it doesn't affect me personally and I have better things to do than try to regain standing on that project.

Short of taking legal action against Trent Toulouse, your article will persist on RatonalWiki as long as the site remains on the internet. The web of manipulation and lies runs far too deep for any editor to be able to delete it even if they were so inclined, the mob would ensure that such an action was quickly reversed. There is no oversight of the editors, they do as they please in a form of direct democratic consensus, so complaints to the board will remain fruitless. In short you are fucked.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 3108
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Has thanked: 389 times
Been thanked: 692 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by ericbarbour » Mon Dec 27, 2021 10:42 pm

Dysklyver wrote:
Mon Dec 27, 2021 6:09 pm
To give some context. When I was elected to the RationalWiki Board of Trustees in 2020 I quickly discovered that nobody actually runs the website, the owner, Trent Toulouse, logs on twice a year to collect donations and pay the hosting service. Every so often David Gerard organises someone to update the website software on an ad-hoc basis without board involvement. The main email contact for the foundation is generally not read, and there is no internal communication regarding any mails received, most of which are binned, assuming the email address you are using even receives mail at all, which they normally don't due to being broken. The foundation website was last maintained by a now banned user. The board has forgotten to file critical legal documents so many times that there is a backlog reaching back to 2013 and it's questionable if the board will ever catch up given that they meet twice a year for an hour and all board matters are conducted in that time.
Funniest thing I've seen this week. And easy to believe. Almost as bad as Encyclopedia Dramatica.
The majority of the board was not amused by this exercise, and unanimously voted to remove me from the board at the beginning of their next meeting, citing misuse of technical access to user data. I was also forced to give up the 'tech' role and thus lost sysadmin access to the site, resulting in Smith resuming activity. I thereupon became involved in an action to ban formally Smith and Abd from RationalWiki, this succeeded, but it gave Smith a forum to air opinions and he was successfully able to influence other editors to informally ban me shortly after. Smith himself is still actively maintaining his articles with an army of new sockpuppets. In the meantime I stopped bothering, it doesn't affect me personally and I have better things to do than try to regain standing on that project.
I could have told you this would happen. Gerard and Toulouse are outright web trolls and don't give a damn about anyone but themselves.
-----
путин грязная маленькая шлюха

User avatar
Strelnikov
Sucks Admin
Posts: 884
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:25 pm
Has thanked: 300 times
Been thanked: 123 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by Strelnikov » Thu Dec 30, 2021 6:35 pm

Dysklyver, that was both horrifying and endlessly illuminating.....they are pretty much running RationalWiki like how Zaiger was running Encyclopaedia Dramatica, except with less malware and pure thievery. Viharo is, I think, a special case because he was an outsider at Wikipedia who became a punching-bag at RationalWiki because those clowns thought he was a lolcow in the KiwiFarms tradition. That he struck back annoyed them, that he had a blog explaining what the Hell was going on pissed them off, which is why when Viharo slipped up and didn't renew Wikipedia, We have a Problem the geeks stole it from him. That is near-psychotic persistence on the part of RationalWiki's editors, to try to bury a blog that exposed their dirty dealings YEARS after the fact, like they were a government with an Official Secrets Act (the UK hides things declared secret for 30 years, and truly damaging stuff can be hidden for longer.) I've known of other cases like this online (the saga of VE7KFM.com, a pure libel website against one Canadian amateur radio operator, comes to mind) but the stakes are so insignificant for the Wikipedians and RationalHeads concerning stuff that should have been acknowledged nearly a decade ago, that it boggles the mind.

When do these people grow up?
Still "Globally Banned" on Wikipedia for the high crime of journalism.

User avatar
WWHP
Sucks
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:31 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by WWHP » Fri Dec 31, 2021 4:02 pm

Dysklyver wrote:
Mon Dec 27, 2021 6:09 pm
In short you are fucked.
Hi, thanks for the thoughtful reply and explanation, and sorry I was a bit gruff about in on the other forum with you before hearing your side of the story.

So Oliver has free reign again across MediaWiki RationalWiki.

Are you willing to go more public about what you shared?

I may not be the one who is fucked here :)

User avatar
WWHP
Sucks
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 12:31 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Aiki Wiki, Wikipedia We Have a Problem update

Post by WWHP » Fri Dec 31, 2021 4:11 pm

Strelnikov wrote:
Thu Dec 30, 2021 6:35 pm
Viharo is, I think, a special case because he was an outsider at Wikipedia who became a punching-bag at RationalWiki because those clowns thought he was a lolcow in the KiwiFarms tradition. That he struck back annoyed them, that he had a blog explaining what the Hell was going on pissed them off, which is why when Viharo slipped up and didn't renew Wikipedia, We have a Problem the geeks stole it from him.
That was a great and quick summary Strelnikov.

RationalWiki was not the only one making that mistake. Making that mistake was also Tim Farley, who has a professional reputation to protect, and instead of just admitting they made a mistake, they doubled down. I think the doubling down came down because the trail showed Farley working alongside Professor Jerry Coyne, who has the Phd of a scientist but the personality of a troll. My belief is that Jerry Coyne got spooked that the case study would reflect on his long, long, long war with Rupert Sheldrake, Coyne is very active against Rupert, and tries to get talks he gives canceled, things like that.

Although WWHP is down, the case study is back up

https://rome-viharo.medium.com/aiki-wik ... dc707bdd22

and as that event informed the Aiki Wiki project, I am in a position to continue to talk about what happened, not to get the article down, not to complain about harassment, but as a case study between majority and minority views and the extreme steps and paths they take to influence MediaWiki's across the web.

So the longer the article is up, the better the case for Aiki Wiki

Thanks for the supporting words!

Post Reply