R.I.P. “Patches”

The BRC Crew is sad to announce that the brave sockpuppet who waded into the swamp -past wrenchwench, and even the lizardoid himself, undetected- and checked thousands of user profile pages (and found that a staggering 15,780 lizards were banned)…has indeed been blocked as well.

We’re going to refrain from revealing the real username of this true hero of sockpuppetry, on the (very good) chance that Johnson didn’t actually discover which account had stolen so many strawberries from him, but rather randomly blocked Patches as part of another genocidal lizard extinction event. Regardless, she strolled through the killing fields, stepped around scores of freshly-slaughtered lizard corpses, and completed her mission with perfect success.

Our hats off to thee…

“Patches” 2011-2012

{{{{{MOMENT OF SILENCE}}}}}


Little Green Sockpuppets

Spotted this alert from our friend SpaceJesus:

Lol. From Wikipedia’s entry-discussion for Little Green Footballs:

replacing valid contrib

recently there was an editwar and the result was the removal of a valid contrib. the way this unfolded was as follows:

-a factual, neutrally-worded and validly sourced contrib was included and remained there for better than a month with no controversy.

-charles johnson, the article’s subject, along with confederates he enlisted, began blanking the section without going to talk. when they finally entered the talk page, they continued their edit war from a position of conflict of interest with personal attacks.

-invalid BLP and RS objections were cited to defeat the contrib.

the result is that, through a campaign of WP:IDONTLIKEIT designed to defeat valid contributions, the article’s subject was able to defeat inclusion of a fact which he acknowledged himself, but would prefer to have dressed only in his own spin or not at all, and a campaign of disruptive and violatory editing was rewarded with their preferred outcome.

the BLP/RS objection was and remains to be invalid. i will explain:

-the substance of the claim is that charles johnson had been caught in the act of revisionist editing of his blog. the source cited was a blog which, for general purposes, complied with the RS specifications for blogs because it was the blog of a professional journalist published under the imprimatur of a major daily newspaper.

-nonetheless, the RS validity of that particular entry was disputed on the claim that it rested the weight of it’s substance on a link to a non-RS compliant blog rather than first-party explication.

-this second, derivative claim is false. there are two links stemming from the source; one was to the non-RS compliant blog, the other was to Johnson’s own blog, admitting that he had been “caught” and spinning it as the innocent correction of a grammatical error.

the result of the [Noticeboard] ruling was given by the senior editor brought into this talk page at the conclusion of the edit war and was, quoting, “If you have Johnson, on Johnson’s blog, saying he picked his nose, then you can use it. He’s a reliable source for what he said/did himself.”

the substance of the erroneously deleted edit, that charles johnson had been caught in the act of revisionist editing, is not “controversial” in any valid sense of the word and the source provided in the contrib is not in violation of the BLP or RS specifications.

consequently, i am re-adding the contrib. Notanipokay (talk) 22:26, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I’m not sure I agree with everything said in the historical summary above, and I’m not sure the two sections added by Notanipokay couldn’t be better worded, but I do agree with the gist of the argument that it’s appropriate to note LGF revisionism here. Mark Shaw (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

mark, i would eagerly accept your edits on the section. i really don’t care if my original wording is intact. i shouldn’t care at all about what becomes of any wikipedia article. what does bother me is the way the subject of this article was able to red-pencil it’s content. Notanipokay (talk) 05:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


Interesting Images From ChenZhen’s Computer

As a seasoned veteran in the arena of blog warfare, I’ve had a chance to study many disciplines within the Art, and have come to respect the power of the Archivist especially.    If used appropriately, it can be invincible.  Add in the screencap and/or snip tool, and the tactic is now weighted with the force of a powerful visual aid, with which you can annihilate an opponent with a single image paste in a thread.

Needless to say, my hard drive is filling up with stuff that I’ve collected over the years.  I’ve used the tactic in other battles on other blogs, of course, but no one requires more MBs than a proven, selective memory holer like the guy who runs LGF.  So I’ve got some things on my ‘puter that never quite made their way into any specific argument or thread topic.   And I figured that, instead of letting them go to waste languishing in my laptop, I might as well share them.  Please use these wisely:

(in reference to this, the LGF Watchers recognizing that CJ is finally denouncing Pam Geller and Filip Dewinter, after many threads over many months of pointing them out)

I suppose that puts that mystery to bed…

Huh?

Wow! 2006?

I am the poster child for a lizard “going rogue”. LOL

absolutely!

what ever happened to defenseman, anyway?

(see here.  friggin’ hilarious!)

that guy is still there?

..and to think people say that the “cult” analogy in our sidebar is over the top?