{"id":4896,"date":"2009-10-30T20:03:43","date_gmt":"2009-10-31T03:03:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/?p=4896"},"modified":"2009-10-30T20:03:43","modified_gmt":"2009-10-31T03:03:43","slug":"leatherstocking-finally-booted-from-wikipedia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/2009\/10\/30\/leatherstocking-finally-booted-from-wikipedia\/","title":{"rendered":"Leatherstocking Finally booted from wikipedia"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you’ve been following my posts regarding Larouche — I first want to ask you, er, Why?<\/em>
\nThen I’ll say that if you’ve been following my posts regarding Larouche, you know about the Wikipedia Editing Job that the Org has been pulling.\u00c2\u00a0 For over a year, this has been dominated by a sock puppet by the nom de plome “Leatherstocking”, a name garnered from the generally maligned<\/a> literature of Fenimore Cooper, though celebrated within the corridors of the Lyndon Larouche movement.<\/p>\n

Finally, after a peculiar history full of “I’m not a Larouchie.\u00c2\u00a0 Who’s calling me a Larouchie?” and after one last attempt to boot out Dennis King from any consideration, he has been kicked out.\u00c2\u00a0 Final edit discussions are interesting and relevant for a gist of the type of things he was wavering the wiki editors were dealing with:<\/p>\n

I have removed this phrase: —<\/em><\/em><\/em> [his followers have been charged with possession of weapons and explosives along with a numbers of violent crimes including kidnapping and assault]<\/em> from the summary of the Allegations section, because there is no reference to any such charges in the body of the text. The only reference to a LaRouche activist getting charged is for disorderly conduct in the liver incident. –Leatherstocking (talk) 15:34, 26 October 2009 (UTC);<\/em><\/p>\n

All very cult-serving.<\/a>
\n<\/em>At any rate, the word on the blocking can be found here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

You have repeatedly denied that you are a person associated with the Lyndon LaRouche organization – [10] [11]. Based on your representations and a lack of other technical evidence to the contrary, I and other administrators have assumed good faith about your Wikipedia contributions and believed that you were an independent person in this matter.<\/em><\/p>\n

However, your internet service provider (RR) has published additional referral WHOIS data on your IP netblock which indicates that you have been lying to us. The IP address you have used a number of times – ( 64.183.125.210 (talk \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> contribs<\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> deleted contribs<\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> page\u00c2\u00a0moves<\/span><\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> block\u00c2\u00a0user<\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> block\u00c2\u00a0log<\/span><\/span><\/span>) ( see [12] for an example of you taking credit for that logged-out edit ) – is now confirmed to be a LaRouche organization’s network block, American System Publications. See http:\/\/www.utrace.de\/whois\/64.183.125.210, http:\/\/www.utrace.de\/ip-adresse\/64.183.125.210.<\/em><\/p>\n

As technical information which is freely available now clearly ties you to the LaRouche organization, which you have repeatedly denied, at the very least you have a clear and evident conflict of interest which you have repeatedly strenuously denied. In addition, your behavior when compared to other, permanently blocked accounts such as the Herschelkrustofsky (talk \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> contribs<\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> deleted contribs<\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> page\u00c2\u00a0moves<\/span><\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> block\u00c2\u00a0user<\/span> \u00c2\u00b7<\/strong> block\u00c2\u00a0log<\/span><\/span><\/span>) account sockpuppet farm seems to fall squarely into the area we have established is off limits. Based on this technical information we now have no reason not to assume that you are part of that organizational sockpuppet team.<\/em><\/p>\n

Phrases that I imagine absolutely goad Leatherstocking: “organizational sockpuppet team.”\u00c2\u00a0 Indeed, Leaterhstocking seems to leap to that one, in claiming he’s getting booted due to “POV”.\u00c2\u00a0 He also shouts “Conspiracy!”
\n“This block is improper in every way. First of all, Georgewilliamherbert is re-interpreting the ArbCom decision to mean something that it does not mean — he is claiming that it is a license to ban editors based on perceived POV (see WP:9STEPS.) If the basis for the ban is to be violation of the LaRouche 2 arbcom decision, the proper procedure would be to go to Wikipedia:Arbitration\/Requests\/Enforcement. I myself filed a request for ArbCom clarification,[13] which resulted in very little clarification. Finally, Georgewilliamherbert is acting here not as an honest broker, but as a proxy for User:SlimVirgin, who is pushing POV at the LaRouche articles and would like to eliminate any opposition.[14<\/em><\/p>\n

AND
\nI am not a banned user. It is being alleged that I have a POV similar to that of a banned user.<\/em>“<\/em><\/p>\n

Actually the larger allegation is that he’s using the same office space of computers as a banned user, and that the computers used provide conclusive evidence that he’s lying and automatically acting in bad faith.\u00c2\u00a0 Back to the statement of banning:<\/p>\n

Based on the totality of the information available at this time, I am placing an indefinite block upon your account. I am extremely dissapointed that the trust that the Wikipedia community showed you was betrayed in this manner. It reflects extremely badly on the LaRouche organizations that you continue to commit such acts of subterfuge to try and spin media information about the organization. One of these days you will come to realize that such actions in the long term harm your reputation far more than merely having external critics and unbiased external reporting and reference sources – until then, unfortunately, we have no option but to extend the indefinite blocks to anyone associated with these activities.<\/em><\/p>\n

Sigh.\u00c2\u00a0 A Zen Parable for you, via a quick google search<\/a>:\u00c2\u00a0 Another version of this story describes a fox who agrees to carry a scorpion on its back across a river, upon the condition that the scorpion does not sting him. But the scorpion does indeed sting the fox when they are in midstream. As the fox begins to drown, taking the scorpion with him, he pleadingly asks why the scorpion has jeopardized both of them by stinging. “Because it’s my nature.”
\n<\/em>I have a hard time believing that “one of these days” he “will come to realize” such actions “harm” “reputations”.<\/p>\n

Will Beback has compiled an interesting list of “Not me” claims<\/a> worth a pursual.\u00c2\u00a0 It is absurd that wikipedia gives these people such a long leash, and I hope they have what it takes to not do so again in the future.\u00c2\u00a0 We shall see, shan’t we?<\/p>\n

Also, as I indicated, I had edited both Dennis King and A.J. Weberman long before I edited a LaRouche article or got into any scrap with SlimVirgin. I would like to see the ArbCom issue very clear guidelines as to constitutes a “pro-LaRouche editor,” so as to prevent the designation of others as “pro-LaRouche editors” from becoming a tactic available to POV-warriors. –Leatherstocking (talk) 00:46, 20 September 2009 (UTC)<\/em><\/p>\n

A good definition of a “pro-LaRouche editor” would certainly include someone using a computer in a LaRouche office to edit Wikipedia. \u00c2\u00a0 Will Beback<\/span> talk<\/span> <\/strong> 09:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)<\/em><\/p>\n

Zing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

If you’ve been following my posts regarding Larouche — I first want to ask you, er, Why? Then I’ll say that if you’ve been following my posts regarding Larouche, you know about the Wikipedia Editing Job that the Org has been pulling.\u00c2\u00a0 For over a year, this has been dominated by a sock puppet by […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4896","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-larouche-challenge"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4896","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4896"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4896\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4897,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4896\/revisions\/4897"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4896"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4896"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4896"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}