AntiSocial dodged this issue | OSTK Message Board Posts, Inc.

  OSTK website

OSTK   /  Message Board  /  Read Message



Rec'd By
Authored By
Minimum Recs
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board
Msg  2601 of 44311  at  12/4/2006 1:20:40 PM  by


AntiSocial dodged this issue

Wikipedia co-founder Jimbo Wales had this response to user Cla68 after he complained about the deletion of a discussion that contained allegations that editor Mantanmoreland is actually Gary Weiss. (This exchange was selectively ignored in their hit piece)

"Cla68, I very much disagree with you about this. The page contained wildly inappropriate speculation that a notable author was sockpuppeting. As I am sure you are aware, many authors have had their careers badly damaged by being caught sockpuppeting at Amazon, etc., and it is deeply wrong for people to ask me to restore a page with such speculations in Wikipedia after the claims have already been investigated and dismissed."

After I asked if Wales, who has access to internal web logs, cookie data, etc. is a liar, Auntie Social had this to say:

"Do we think Mr. Wales is lying? No. He simply does not have the same perspective benefiting those of us whoíve been examining this issue for some time. Therefore, Iíll assume good faith on the part of Mr. Wales, knowing itís very unlikely he would feel the same way if he had access to the knowledge weíre trying to impart by way of"

Noticing the tap dancing, I posed an obvious follow up question. It was ignored, probably because it would be a hard one to answer with a straight face.

"Are you saying he does not have as much data or he does not have the same bias? Itís not clear. Was it meant to be vague?

Wouldnít Wales (or whomever does this at Wikipedia) have access to Wikipedia web logs, etc. that would either prove or disprove the claims? Isnít that how all those aliases of WordBomb were detected? What data do you have that is better than what they have?

The innuendo SEEMS to be that they have failed to detect that Weiss is sockpuppeting (what an embarassing word to type, yuck) and they are incorrect in detecting 20 something sockpuppets of WordBomb. Is that your claim? You do a lot of leading innuendo so its very difficult to tell what you are claiming most of the time.

If that is indeed the claim, are they being dishonest or incompetent? Or is there another possibility I am not seeing? "

I re-pose that question here. Let the tap dancing commence.

     e-mail to a friend      printer-friendly     add to library      
| More
Recs: 0     Views: 1351
Previous Message  Next Message   Post Message   Post a Reply return to message boardtop of board

About Us  •  Contact Us  •  Follow Us on Twitter  •  Members Directory  •  Help Center  •  Advertise
Not a member yet? What are you waiting for? Create Account
Want to contribute? Support InvestorVillage by donating
© 2003-2019 All rights reserved. User Agreement
Financial Market Data provided by