Darryl L. Smith

If you see this page on an internet archive, it may have been updated and errors corrected. Always check the current version of archived pages!

subpage of anglo-pyramidologist

Oliver D. Smith has claimed to have a brother, and I found rumors that this was a twin. There is apparently a directory or public record listing page, I have not verified it directly, but I was able to find sufficient confirmation to post it as likely authentic. It showed, from some years back, Oliver D. Smith and Darryl L. Smith as being of the same age and apparently living with parents, and it showed the home address — and another, older brother. I removed this and redacted the address and the non-AP names as not needed for any ongoing purpose. If anyone cares, the original directory could be obtained. (I simply didn’t want to spend the money, it would be on a paywall site — which AP socks think somehow means “private,” as they scream about revealing “private information.” It does mean that this is a simple form “doxxing,” particularly with regard to Darryl Smith, who has not voluntarily revealed his identity, so this information would violate WikiMedia Foundation policies and should not be posted or linked from any WMF wiki.) It is not doxxing in the sense of revealing phone numbers, home address, work address, or other very personal information.

Then Oliver D. Smith verified “twin” and more. This page collects evidence regarding Darryl. What did Oliver claim?

Apparently feeling the heat of many outings around the internet, including mine,  Oliver wrote me, using a public email address known to be his (from his blog and wiki on Atlantis).  The emails are here. (He has later claimed he was “harassed” by me by email. No, he wrote me and I responded, inviting him to reduce damage by simply revealing the truth, whatever he knew. In the end, he rejected this as too much trouble. He continues to be active, doing the same things. Or his brother is doing a good job imitating him. His choice if he tolerates it.)

From the January 25, 2018 email my emphasis.

… none of those MetaWiki/Wikiversity accounts are mine, with the exception of Za Frumi and possibly one other when I left him a comment on his user talk – this was months back. And the only reason I showed up there is because mistaken identity. The fact is, I don’t post on these websites and have never disrupted them. 99.9% of those accounts are my twin brother. I have no idea what any of that stuff is and it doesn’t involve me. I’ve tried explaining this to Rome Viharo about Wikipedia for ages, but he never listens. For example, I was never “Dan Skeptic”/”Goblin Face” on Wikipedia. Yet I’m named on his website when I never spoke with him on Wikipedia.

From interests (see below confirming my prior impressions), Dan Skeptic and Goblin Face, (the second is an acknowledged sock of the first) and the vast array of Wikiversity and Meta Wiki socks, and the impersonation socks on Wikipedia — which are continuing, and recently — would be Darryl L. Smith. I notice that Oliver does not deny editing Wikipedia, and recently blocked accounts there were following his particular acknowledged interests. The recent impersonation socks on Wikipedia (impersonating Rome Viharo, successfully) would likely be Darryl as well (though Oliver might have an interest in discrediting Viharo as well, due to Viharo’s naming of Oliver Smith as the sock master.)

.. [it’s claimed that] my twin brother edits from my house. However, that was mostly years back when we were young. Regardless, I have no control over his activities, he doesn’t now live with me, although does sometimes visit.

“Sometimes visit” is enough to create the “technical evidence” that AP socks often deny exists. “I have no control over his activities” is a self-serving claim, and I pointed out that he does have the power to reveal what he knows about his brother, which can be a form of control. If he allows his brother to disrupt and defame, he becomes responsible as a “sin of omission.” Under some conditions he could even be legally responsible. The fact is that he is apparently suffering because of the activity of his brother, and does apparently support and defend his brother, as we will see. In the earlier “brother evidence,” Darryl was apparently living at home, while Oliver was mostly away as a university student. Oliver visiting home was enough to create the technical evidence leading to both brothers being blocked. But both had been disruptive, and Wikipedia doesn’t care about “my brother did it.” Restrain your brother, or be blocked. The claim was not particularly believed at the time and for Wikipedia purposes, it did not matter.

In AP sock rejection of the “Smith brothers conspiracy theory,” the “theory” is commonly overstated, and it’s true that many critics don’t distinguish between the brothers. But they created this confusion, and then rely on it. Notice that the claim of “my twin brother edits from my house” is rejected, while, in fact, it is admitted. The claim is converted to “always edits from my house,” to make it false, then that it might occur is effectively admitted. Identified IP for the AP editors is often open proxy, and there is technical evidence that might distinguish them, but … that starts to get into thinking of checkuser and similar examination as “magic pixie dust.” They slip, sometimes, forget to enable the open proxy, or whatever. It’s information, not absolute proof. Ever. However, the probability of false identification can become low, under some conditions. WMF checkusers will not reveal details, usually, because of privacy policy. But then they sometimes do, by actions. I have no privacy policy here to violate and I have similar evidence available, as a blogger with domain access, and more.

Under some conditions, the use of an open proxy is an effective admission that the identity is being concealed, which then makes claimed identity implausible or unlikely. There is an exception: where I know that if I reveal my identity I will be blocked, I may still claim the identity but use an open proxy. I would not do this if I feel secure from being blocked just for being me. I have not blocked anyone on this blog, nor has anyone been harassed. Revealing a person’s name in an obscure evidence page is not “harassment.” Getting an enemy’s mother fired (which has been done by Oliver Smith, apparently, his denials were actually minimizations, not denial of the harassment. Not “I didn’t send that email to her employer,” but “I did not get her fired.” (Subtext: the employer made the decision, not me. I’m innocent!!!) But sending emails to the employer of a relative would be “harassment” in the WMF definition. So Oliver actually did — (less likely, he brother did) what I was accused of to the WMF, and that I did not do. Back to Darryl per his brother:

The overlap between us is actually very minor. We both have different qualifications, interests etc; for example I have no interest in debunking the paranormal, while he does. What little I do know is that he is linked to ‘skeptic’ organisations, supposedly is either paid or works with other people. I do not see any ‘real world’ harm by what he does though, if he’s just refuting or criticising spiritualists or ghost-believers where is the harm?

That there may be payment involved is ridiculed on RationalWiki, but, in fact, an AP sock on Wikiversity or meta (I forget which) bragged about being supported by a major organization. I’ll look that up. Rome Viharo has been pursuing the possible involvement of skeptical organizations. There is some plausibility to what he has suspected.

Where is the “real world harm”? The harm is when false or misleading claims are made, to defame individuals (or organizations). That can be illegal or actionable. Here, Oliver is “defending” his brother, which creates a kind of responsibility, but the point here is the brother’s activity. “Debunking” is an activity quite different from, say, what CSICOP was founded to encourage, the “scientific investigation of the paranormal.” There is common “real world harm” when a RationalWiki article, created to defame, is used to source information, reported by mainstream media without caution. Examples can be provided! Real-world harm is done when a person negotiating a business deal is asked about RationalWiki charges. AP socks have claimed that I have “weaponized” Google. In reality, that’s what they have done for a long time. Again, back to Darryl:

Yes, a major diagnostic identification of what, after I became aware of the identity claims on the internet, but before I verified them, I called, on the WMF meta wiki, “AP/D”, would be attacking “paranormal believers.” I.e., [redacted]. But there are overlaps. [redacted], it is claimed, was a racist and/or fascist, at one time, and the RW article claims he still is. As well, Oliver emphasizes racialism or hereditarianism as “pseudoscience,” when they are more rationally “fringe science,” and that confusion is quite common among pseudoskeptics. Looking at the interests of those I have identified as “AP socks,” there is often overlap, a primary focus may be racialism or fascism, (“Neo-Nazis”) but then there are edits to articles on “psi believers.” I will, if I find time, create classifications to measure the overlap.

I am not a “Ghost believer,” nor am I a “spiritualist,” though AP socks attempted to establish the latter because I was involved with a “spiritual organization,” but the word has a very different meaning in that context. Alcoholics Anonymous — an example, I am not an alcoholic — is a “spiritual organization” while being organizationally non-religious, and many members are atheists. It refers to the “spirit” of life, i.e., the essence of it, the “meaning.” This is an example of how AP socks distort reality in order to pursue defamation. I don’t think Oliver created my article, rather the creator, Marky, was Darryl. Probably. This article was part of a plan of revenge threatened by AP socks on Wikiversity and the meta wiki. That would be Darryl.

January 30, 2018 (second mail)

You have no legitimate criticism against my brother or myself. We simply have used RW to document and refute pseudo-science. No laws broken.

Also – I’m now inactive on RW.

Defamation is against the law in the United Kingdom. As well, not all offenses have been on RW. As an example, Oliver called Emil Kirkegaard a “pedophile” in these emails. The claim in the RW article on Emil, which Oliver has admitted creating, calls him a “pedophile apologist” and a “child rape apologist,” neither of which are true, but which can be “evidenced” by citing a six-year-old blog post of his that can look like that if one reads only the quoted sentences, and not the context. This is how the Smith brothers “lie with the truth.” They take a fact out of context. The article on me on RW was created by Darryl, I assume, as fulfilment of his threats. They prominently quote this from me:

…were I an attorney, and a pedophile were charged with a crime (pedophilia is not a crime!), I might defend one. —Abd Lomax in his defence of child-rape apologist Emil Kirkegaard[1]


What I was pointing out was that “defending a pedophile” was actually normal, under some circumstances, such as being a defense attorney, all defendants are entitled to counsel, and counsel is obligated to defend them to the best of their ability. However, I was not actually “defending” Emil Kirkegaard, nor is he a “child-rape apologist” and those claims were libelous. I am a defender of academic freedom and free speech. I was an officer of the Cal Tech chapter of the ACLU, and the ACLU defends civil liberties for all people regardless of their sometimes offensive opinions. However, AP socks believe that this quotation “proves” their claim that I defend neo-nazis and child rape proponents. I’m not defending the targets, but exposing the defamation, which has caused extensive damage.

Emil Kirkegaard, I think he would agree, is a racialist (or “race realist”) it is called, and a hereditarian on intelligence. Those are not racist or neo-Nazi positions, though the kind of research that Kirkegaard does may be used by racists to justify positions (that do not actually follow from the research). Kirkegaard is outspoken, but denies the charges. The “evidence” that Kirkegaard is “neo-Nazi” is very weak and easily subject to alternate interpretation — but AP socks never mention alternate interpretations when such are possible, since their purpose is defamation. RationalWiki, in general, encourages this, the site motto might as well be “Snark Forever!” But the AP socks take it to extremes, and AP socks are enabled and protected there, as is Oliver D. Smith.  (An article by that name was salted, so that only administrators may create it. Why does Oliver D. Smith get this special protection? Inquiring minds want to know. He claims, as “ODS,” that an article was created by a troll, but that is how most RW articles (in the AP interest areas) are created. A new account appears and creates them. But there is no article in history, as any RW sysop can see, unless it was suppressed, which would indicate high-level protection. If the article was over-the-top defamation of Smith, it might have been created by a troll, indeed. The outing of Oliver D. Smith has been going on  for a long time, but it is generally addressed with ordinary deletion, not suppression, which hides it from even sysops. Maybe it’s time for an RW article on Oliver D. Smith. Contrary to what he claims, it could easily be created by any new account. He has many enemies, created by his highly aggressive and offensive behavior over the years. Plus he creates articles on himself to then blame on his enemies!

The account ODS on RationalWiki acknowledges being Oliver. There is a conversation with another account that looks very much like his brother, Debunking spiritualism. That account has done much to increase suspicion of being an AP sock, starting with the name. The many rapid article creations, showing Darryl interest, is the major early indication. Those are new articles, and so these had not been noticed by me before. They will be added to the RationalWiki/Anglo Pyramidologist study. Eventually, I will attempt to sort the socks.

But here is “Debunking spiritualism” demonstrating that he is Darryl:

Abd Lomax sock-puppeting on Rationalwiki

Lomax was blocked on Rationalwiki and globally banned by the Wikimedia Foundation, so he has now resorted to creating sock accounts (some impersonation) and using proxy IPS. His agenda appears to be spamming his Cold Fusion Community blog around on here for traffic. These are the accounts he has created so far:


He has doxxed users and threatened both Rationalwiki and the Wikimedia Foundation with legal threats on his blog. I believe he should be blocked if he turns up on any more. He has given up on accounts and is now using proxies. Lomax has now sided with Rome Viharo. The Viharo talk-page has been locked. If there is constant vandalism here this may be recommended. Debunking spiritualism (talk) 04:18, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Fascinating. He leaves out one account, and the reason is obvious:


is the only account I have used to edit RationalWiki since I was blocked. [this was true when written.] The single edit that was allowed — it was immediately blocked — actually has most of the list given above. That single edit included an authentication link to prove it was me. This is a classic AP trick: create blatant abusive socks that self-identify as the target of his harassment. Remarkably, that seems to fool some administrators.

The impersonation socks listed were almost certainly created by the same person who is operating Debunking spiritualism, who is a typical AP sock with typical behavior, (and, by the way, very quickly given sysop tools, even though obviously obsessed with Abd.

AP socks — and this may be entirely Darryl Smith — have long created socks that impersonate blocked users, in order to continue defaming the person (and sometimes they are behind the original block.) In this case, though, Skeptical, who blocked me, was almost certainly Oliver, not Darryl.  Does it matter?

“Threatened with legal threats.” What I pointed out was that what Oliver Smith triggered, almost certainly by lying to the WMF, along with a few others, a possible cause of action against the WMF that can bypass the limitations in the Terms of Service. I’m not going to explain all the legal details here, but there are negotiations under way that might lead to a lifting of the global ban, because the truly disruptive user, actually violating the TOS, was Darryl L. Smith. Oliver tossed his hat in with his complaint, as did some others whom, I suspect, lied in complaints. None of that can be hidden if there is a lawsuit. The Smiths have never faced this before, and I am aware of no situation before where the WMF was exposed like this, to a user prepared to defend his honor and reputation in court. Others have been considering legal action for a long time, so … many hands make short work. Enough is enough, too much is too much.

[I did not actually file action until February 25, 2019. Here is the Docket for Lomax v. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., et al, with copies of all significant documents.

Meanwhile, RationalWiki has set up a toxic site that fosters defamation, and is far more negligent in this respect than Wikipedia. Recent events have shown that RationalWiki articles can be picked up by news reporters and defamation on RW then makes a “mainstream newspaper.” I have initiated no process on RationalWiki yet, but will, eventually, if it remains  necessary. One step at a time. I’ve been documenting what AP socks do, and Darryl just gave me a splendid example, lying about those socks.

Now, the IPs. I have no intention of disclosing anonymous editing at this time, but would do so in a lawsuit. With this edit, Darryl attempts to doxx all those accounts, and the IPs, as being me. Thus he is doing what he has long accused me of doing, doxxing, when what I did had remained short of it, carefully and deliberately.

Turnabout is fair play. Doxxing at this level is not illegal. Impersonation to defame is, just about everywhere.

So what did those IPs do? triggered the edit filter, generating a spam warning. It looks like he broke the comment into sections, and narrowed it down to the inclusion of five names, the names of AP targets, some obvious ones would be me, Rome Viharo, Emil Kirkegaard, Ben Steigmann, I’m not sure who else. Why would these names trigger an edit filter? I don’t know. It’s weird. The IP was blocked by CozmicDebris, for “doxing” and he reverted the edits — but did not hide them.

However, another IP appeared and restored that material, saying it was not doxxing. was not blocked, even though admittedly the same user as .225. At this point, the material is not blanked, but was collapsed by Debunking spirituality, who is, then, hiding fact about his brother. The original discussion on that user page for ODS was, now that we know more — Darryl advising Oliver about publishing the WMF email. Why? Who other than the brother — or someone closely allied — would care about that?

It would establish that included in the complaints leading to the global ban for Abd were complaints by an abusive sock master, blocked from editing Wikipedia since 2011, who could not have been a victim of personal abuse through the wiki system.

SO Darryl both collapsed the discussion and semiprotected the page.  The collapse header: “Abd ul-Rahman Lomax socking + spam” The semiprotection comment: “Spam and sock-puppeting from Abd Lomax.”

There were no external links or web site promotion in the collapsed material. The references to the cold fusion community site, recently (notably without links, have been from AP socks, almost certainly Darryl, from the long-term behavior.  If this were me, wouldn’t I at least include a direct or, almost as useful and impossible to filter out without major damage, spam-filter munged link (simply remove the http:// part and the rest of the URL should sail through a MediaWiki spam filter. I did that many times on Wikipedia, when I was fixing abusively blacklisted sites — before I was blocked there).

I also would not combine “spam” or “outing” or even “legal threats” with clearly disruptive edits, and would not telegraph them with user names broadcasting “Abd,” or, in one case, using my birth-name initials. No, this is obvious: Debunking spirituality is Darryl Smith, who is obsessed with me and with getting me blocked and banned, but his scheme is falling apart.

CheeseburgerFace, a relatively sane RW sysop and moderator commented, replying to the blanking by CozmicDebris, after the restored section by the new IP, which now displaying after the collapsed section, “@Cosmikdebris: This isn’t actually doxing. At least, I don’t think it is.”

“Abd ul-Rahman Lomax socking” was doxxing, purporting to reveal (without evidence or necessity) the real name of the anonymous user, which offense has been loudly alleged about me, over and over, not to mention the impersonation socks, which were blatant impersonations (as with many before, if anyone was taking the time to think. But “rational” on RationalWiki often means “whatever impulse I have without using evidence and logic.” Abusers are protected and article targets who complain or attempt to correct errors are attacked and blocked. “Socking” is rich. It is completely obvious that Debunking spiritualilty is a long-time user — and some of the accounts were blocked for serious offenses. ODS repeats, in an ensuing edit, that he’s created and worked on many articles. Not by that name! So he is “socking.” This is not normally considered a violation of policy on RW, unless your name is three letters, starting with A and ending with D.

I know how to create links to my blog on RationalWiki, if I want and need to. I have, so far, only created one, a link to an identification page, containing no other content, verifying the account putting it up as belonging to me. That comment is here. The edit was reverted by GrammarCommie, and the account was blocked by him for block evasion. So a block appeal is reverted as block evasion, turning a block into a ban. Way to go, GC. Brilliant. Step by step, I’m being pushed toward taking legal action for defamation. I have a legal theory that might be useful to test, that could blow the TOS protections out of the water. But I have not yet actually retained counsel or sued, I am considering legal action, the same as ODS, who, with his brother, loudly proclaims “legal threats,” but makes them himself.

The edit, which was a request to consider unblocking and resysopping, was collapsed, so the next time I do this, it will be on the Chicken Coop. I’m not in a rush because it’s likely a waste of time, but … I’ll get around to it. That account will also be disclosed. If the faction supporting ODS and his brother attempt to stop that, and if the RationalWiki community allows it, the entire community becomes responsible, just as we are all responsible if we allow lunatics to carry the nuclear football. “Responsible” means that reality just might punish us and all our children and our entire species. Or the whole wiki.

There are signs, though, that some moderators might actually take some interest.

This posting was then copied by Kujilia. I was not Kujilia, and I did not write (or know about) what is added to what I wrote. It was reverted, and Kujilia blocked, as “block evasion,” That could be because the user quotes my prior post, which then begins with “I,” so this would look like self-identification.

However, I wouldn’t have done that if I wanted to create what would look possibly independent. I’d have pointed to the original edit, then I’d have added anything new as not coming from Abd. A request for unblock and resysop with no account name in it would be really dumb.

Who was Kujilia? I don’t know for sure. I had a reason to suspect Darryl Smith, and the sloppiness points to that, but … would Darryl have added the new material (which certainly did not come from me) about David Gerard? I doubt Rome Viharo, very much, though the material is confirming a suspicion of his. More likely, if not a Smith impersonation sock, this would be one of the many enemies the Smiths have created.

However, the choice of user name points to Darryl, because I had [ added Kujilia] to the last checkuser request I filed on the WMF meta wiki, and, above, DS claims I had a vendetta against that user. In fact, I had a small suspicion created by a single edit on Wikipedia to an article of high interest to Oliver, and wrote that. Reviewing his edits in more detail, I doubt that he was a sock. But AP socks often attempt to inflame disagreements, to turn them to their own purposes.

As well, the editing pattern for Kujilia points to this being another AP sock. A flurry of quick edits, too quick to be written, copied and pasted, to get many edits in before being blocked. (I might use this technique, but … probably one edit in the right place, and not blatant and repeated vandalism or harassment, which is what AP socks do. Watch for a post to the Chicken Coop, with a quick post to the Saloon Bar, both using a named account confirmed on my blog Identification page, as before.

(Searching for the original text, the additional text was copied from Rome Viharo’s blog. AP socks do this to desensitize the community to the claims, to make it appear that it is all coming from “trolls” and people upset with “criticism of pseudoscience.” Notice that there are no actual links to the site, neither direct (like the link above) or spam or edit filter-evading, as would be:  wikipediawehaveaproblem.com/2018/01/the-attack-of-david-gerards-50ft-troll-farm/

If this is Darryl, then, he is actually attacking David Gerard, creating increased visibility for the Viharo page. The socks directly and clearly impersonating me also harassed Gerard, similarly.

An IP later linked to the original post by me.

I keep finding more and more stuff, such as a possible legal threat from GrammarCommie. If RW sysops and moderators had email enabled, they’d be getting information privately, but … they don’t, for the most part. How did I find this? By stalking GC? No. By the edits of the impersonation socks to the Nerd talk page. Since I was being impersonated, I looked at what they did. AP socks keep leaving trails like that. Months back, they led me to the current user page on Wikipedia for Joshua P. Schroeder, which I didn’t know until then. Why not? Because I wasn’t stalking him! If one looks at the article creations and comments of AP socks, they stalk their targets, obsessively and thoroughly and frequently. That’s easy to show….

So, Debunking skepticism contributions (as of March 1, he’s stopped editing and may or may not return. AP socks often disappear when accused) show a heavy obsession with me. And with his latest edits, he reverts the user Dealer, which is an impersonation sock, after my actual sock “The real deal,” and blocks him. He’s awfully quick, which I saw before with the first gaggle of impersonation or disruptive socks that appeared on RationalWiki, just before Skeptical blocked me.

They were, in fact, legal threats, the problem being a possible identification of the offender, which RoninMacbeth did not do (but Debunking spirituality did, when he was almost certainly the offender. There is only one known person who would behave as he did, as seen in history.)

The content of all of Dealer’s edits is the same, emphasis added:

The chickens are coming home to roost. The truth comes out. That is not a threat, it is simply reality. If Lomax files his contemplated action, he will likely be filing evidence with affidavits under penalty of perjury. You and the Rationalmedia Foundation will be sued. [[User:Dealer|Dealer]] ([[User talk:Dealer|talk]]) 05:21, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

This was copied from this edit of , blocked for “doxing” that wasn’t. But the statement, “You and the Rationalmedia [sic] Foundation will be sued” was supplied by whoever was trolling. As the correctly quoted part indicates, I am contemplating legal action, I do have sufficient grounds to file a case, and the author of this post knew enough law to know how evidence is created in a legal action. Sworn testimony! Trolls are accustomed to having no responsibility at all for lies they put up.

The context of that remark was claims from the AP socks that I might be lying about the Oliver emails. Indeed, I might be, but I’m not, and it would be singularly stupid, if I’m considering legal action. I would testify under oath, and if found to be lying, that could be prison time. Would Smith deny them under penalty of perjury? If I go into court with “unclean hands,” the chance of failure would increase substantially.

So the context was removed, and RW sysops without a knowledge of law might misinterpret the claim, presented out of context. I have listed possible defendants in an action, and they included the RMF, but not generally the people whose pages the threat was dropped on. I would certainly notify the RMF before filing and provide an opportunity to ameliorate harm.

This is simply more AP deception. The timing is totally obvious: Darryl (almost certainly him instead of Oliver), created the Dealer account and edited at mostly the maximum rate possible for a non-autoconfirmed account. Then he logged out and logged in as Debunking spiritualism, within two minutes, and proceeded to “clean up” the mess, blaming it all on me. Others see this and, without having background, find it plausible. It’s not. Tim Farley (Wikipedia user Krelnik), saw through the same tricks on Wikipedia with regard to Rome Viharo. Others fell for them in various cases. Too many administrators are one-eyed and have no depth perception.

Debunking spiritualism is Darryl L. Smith.

(There is other evidence from the old 2011 Wikipedia SPI case for Anglo Pyramidologist, confirming the brothers, but Oliver D. Smith’s testimony in his verified emails nails it.)

I will add revealed articles to the RationalWiki list of articles page. Darryl, in this case, started with a slew of minor articles on psychics or the like. ODS also revealed an article he had edited, but this was merely Krom, already well-known to be him.  He seems to think that I’m claiming he never did good work. I’ve never claimed that. Whether the work is “good” or not, however, is another story.

Debunking spiritualism on a rampage.

I just noticed that the only edit of Authentic has been revision-deleted. So here it is, with the involved log(s).

The edit. The content:

More impersonation socks

This account is verified as Abd ul-Rahman Lomax here. The many vandal and trolling accounts pretending to be me are impersonation socks, and the one who is intensely aware of them, obsessed by me, is … nah, you can figure it out. I could say more, but won’t. A word to the wise is sufficient. —Authentic (talk) 20:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Activity with this:

What “inappropriate account or personal information”? My blog is linked from my article, but the page linked above only contains identify verification, as can be seen.  No, this is actual suppression of legitimate and non-disruptive communication. The contributions and logs demonstrate the massive obsession of Debunking spiritualism (DS) with me. And I’m not a spiritualist — at all! I will, below, examine the full history of this account, which shows long-term Darryl Smith interest.

(cur | prev20:53, 5 March 2018‎ Deal (talk | contribs)‎ . . (105,474 bytes) (+512)‎  added the above, but did not use the header, and added to it, below, so  this is how it looks … and when they see this, they will likely more competently hide it, so there is http://archive.is/3vXdt at the bottom.

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax is being harassed by skeptics at Rationalwiki

This account is verified as Abd ul-Rahman Lomax here. The many vandal and trolling accounts pretending to be me are impersonation socks, and the one who is intensely aware of them, obsessed by me, is … nah, you can figure it out. I could say more, but won’t. A word to the wise is sufficient. —Authentic (talk) 20:36, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Deal is an impersonation sock, restoring what Darryl had rev-deleted, and adding a new subject header. That is his message, not mine. I am not being “harassed by skeptics.” Long story. The article is defamatory, and the impersonation socks are defamatory, but …. this isn’t “skeptics,” it is a long-term internet troll who pretends to be a skeptic because he found he could find cover with the RationalWiki community, and perhaps even payment, which a troll claimed here — as Darryl had claimed before with socks on Wikiversity and/or the meta wiki. The AP story is that I hate skeptics, which is ironic because I’m a skeptic, and even have credentials. “Skeptic” does not mean that one believes the JREF party line, real skeptics are very careful about “belief.” It doesn’t mean “debunker” who uses ad-hominem irrelevancies to attack what might be pseudoscience or woo, or what might simply be not understood by the debunker. I’m a Truzzi-style skeptic, I hope.

Much of this blog has been skeptical coverage of various cold fusion topics. I also write about the science, real science, published in mainstream peer-reviewed journals — and I don’t believe that just because something is published in such a journal, it is necessarily true. One of my friends, I think I can call him that, a hero of sorts, though, like most of us, a mixed bag, is Gary Taubes, debunker of Bad Science in many fields.

“Deal” is a takeoff on “The real deal“, previously authenticated by me,  and immediately blocked (by GrammarCommie, who is unlikely to be a Smith sock — but I now think that almost anything is possible. Smith socks have boasted having many accounts, including Wikipedia accounts. They know how to evade checkuser, but sometimes slip up — or don’t care.) The impersonation socks have included takeoffs like that, and part of the Smith method is utilizing confusion created by these names. He can suck in the unwary into thinking the accounts are actually the same.

Setting aside IP edits, the only actual edit by me, then in that recebnt history of the Saloon Bar was revision-deleted, username and edit summary deleted, by DS. Whereas the impersonation socks remain. (and, ironically, because of the impersonation sock, even the text and the link to my blog remain.

The impersonation socks that day, on the Saloon Bar:

A full disclosure is a takeoff on Full disclosure, registered at 20:43, blocked by DS at 20:47, and impersonated within a few minutes. (registration at 21:00) I had not yet authenticated the account.

A full disclosure added this to the Saloon Bar (it has been revision-deleted):

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax‎‎ is being impersonated and harassed by biased skeptic Rationalwiki trolls. It is clearly Tim Farley doing this. This was the same man who has harassed Rome Viharo. Lomax will document all this on coldfusioncommunity.net

This is not my message at all. AP hides as a skeptic, and I have no quarrel with Tim Farley. (I’ve criticized his work, rather mildly, but he is not at all to blame for the impersonation socking, as far as I know. He actually pointed to an impersonation of Rome Viharo on Wikipedia, and the only thing really true here is being impersonated by “trolls” and documentation of the trolling. The community actually being disrupted is RationalWiki, what part of it isn’t AP dominated.

As to harassment, the article on me could be considered that, created and mostly edited by Darryl socks.

These Saloon Bar impersonation socks (and also disruptive elsewhere, with threats) were reverted and blocked: CF at 19:50 by ReadyMade, 35672 at 20:27 by Bongolian (not suspected of being an AP sock), Deal at 20:56 by DS, and A full disclosure at 21:03 by ReadyMade.

21:06, 5 March 2018‎ Readymade (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (104,736 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Changed protection level for “RationalWiki:Saloon bar“: Excessive vandalism: Lomax gonna lomax ([Edit=Allow only autoconfirmed users] (expires 21:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite)))

By this time, Readymade has seen strong evidence that the disruption was not from me. My suspicion is now that Readymade is an AP sock, designed to hide the fact initially. It is also possible that he is just the common RW idiot, there are quite a few of those, too. His reaction to this comment from me was to simply revert it with “yeah yeah jimmy jimmy) .” That’s his right, but …. I wished him good luck and “all the best” and he removed it. So he won’t have good luck, and he will find “the best” elusive, not my problem, it is not even up to me, but to how he lives. The worst possible curse: condemned to edit RationalWiki. They think it is a joke that being blocked is a “promotion.”

The world outside is far more fun.

Signs to notice: account created Jan 1, 2018. User page: “I used to be here, but now I’m not. Also, tea.” So he is a returning user. Who was he? Somebody knows. Christopher welcomes him and offers to hide an IP edit to the Saloon Bar. I could find no trace of such an edit. Christopher was a tech, and, with moderators, which he also is, has the suppressrevision right, so he can hide edits even from sysops. Those who have database access (I don’t know who has that) could completely remove material from the database.

On January 9, Readymade was given autopatrolled, and sysop was offered. January 12, it was given by Spriggina. This is damn fast! I’ve seen this with AP socks, they are quickly opped. It’s fairly obvious, at least in some cases. There is off-wiki communication.

AP socks are being supported and enabled and also protected. Details are beginning to come out. They have often claimed it, see the Comment published here today, but this wasn’t the first claim.

(By the way, there is nothing illegal about being paid to edit RationalWiki. It is a TOS violation to be paid to edit Wikipedia, without disclosing it (with the account or accounts used), but that doesn’t make it illegal. What Smith socks have claimed would be grounds for a global WMF ban, in addition to impersonations, which also explicitly violate the TOS, besides being actually criminal. So the Smith claims about me are particularly ironic.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Quack_Hunter on Wikipedia was Darryl L. Smith.

16:50, 28 March 2015 User account Quack Hunter (talk | contribs) was created. An early edit to his user page added a JzG userbox. This links to an essay JzG wrote, Lunatic Charlatans. The Quack Hunter user page affirms and JzG material openly demonstrates JzG’s long-term defiance of neutrality policy. JzG got people banned for allegedly treating Wikipedia as a battleground, but he did this for many years. Later events have create substantial suspicion of collusion with the Smith brothers, as claimed by them.

“Wikipedia administrators love us,” an AP sock claimed to me (believed to be Darryl L. Smith). In the light of subsequent events, it’s an astonishing revelation. AP socks lie routinely, but there are bursts of truth. So I will go over this comment.

You can delete this message if you like. Just to let you know I will not be further engaging you. It seems you live for this drama, I will not longer be involved.

At that point, I was simply documenting the obvious impersonation and other disruptive socking of an LTA, having seen evidence that linked this to the Anglo Pyramidologist family of socks, and that had attacked a Wikiversity user and a Wikiversity educational resource (which was neutral, but the antifringe faction treats anything short of their extreme point of view as “promoting pseudoscience,” or the like.

I will do my best behind the scenes via email to get admins to delete all your material.

He did exactly that, and his brother joined in, and so did two long-term factional Wikipedians.

If you want to spend the rest of your life stalking someone that is up to you, but it is not healthy.

Concern trolling. I doubt that I will “spend the rest of my life” with this study, because it is leading up to legal action which may resolve this not only for me but for many others.

I object to such a thing. I am done with this. I would like to add though that AngloPyramidologist is innocent.

He’s not innocent, but he was probably not the creator of the massive socks I was looking at then. This is Darryl saying that his brother is innocent of that, thus agreeing with what his brother has claimed. But both have used impersonation socks

If you want the debunker of parapsychology/or pseudoscience it is me.

This would be GoblinFace, but there is another possibility. There is an older brother in the family. So far, though I have not seen enough evidence to warrant mentioning his name..

I have debated [redacted] in the past, he knows who I am, I have talked to him on Wikipedia in 2014. I have nothing against [redacted] personally, unfortunately he uses Wikipedia to promote his fringe beliefs, he promised in 2014 not to come back but his mistake was coming back in 2017.

The user mentioned did minor socking on Wikipedia, and a request for checkuser was filed by,  Michael skater claiming to be a Wikiversity user. He was lying. This was Darryl L. Smith, also known as Quack Hunter/GoblinFace, and by many other names.

That is something I object to, and of course the admins were too slow in banning his psychicbias and myerslover account. So you see I had to get him banned.

He is here admitting to the impersonation socking (confirmed by checkusers, including when they globally locked this account). This is, in fact, how he thinks. He thinks of “fringe beliefs” as enemies of rationality and humanity, and therefore to be attacked and “fringe believers” silenced, and he is willing to lie and deceive to achieve this noble goal.

Take care. Btw I do object to the ‘troll’ allegations. I have written over 250 articles on Wikipedia. As to this very day 30/9/2017 I have four Wikipedia accounts and 12 others I occasionally use, the admins are only interested in banning vandals. If you are atheist, pro-skeptic like me and debunking fringe beliefs the admins love us.

He thinks so, and for the faction he interacts with, generally, he is correct. Reviewing enforcement on Wikipedia, “pro-fringe” gets sanctioned and banned quickly, whereas “pro-skeptics” get a pass, even when behavior grossly violates policies. I was banned on Wikipedia, to make a long story short, because I confronted — successfully! — bias like this. I’m not the only one. Anyone who confronted the “cabal” — it was called in media — was attacked and worn down and rubbed out. In this affair, that faction reached out and corrupted Wikiversity.

I can’t go wrong. I was even offered paid work from the owner of a skeptic group.

His brother wrote that “to his knowledge” he was paid or working with an organization. This would be an off-wiki organization organized to promote skeptical points of view on Wikipeda. There are several possibilities.

I still create articles perhaps 12 or so a week.

It’s plausible. There are possible suspects, but nothing where I have enough evidence, so far, to name them. I will be bringing 0n-line more powerful sock detection tools, that can be effective with users with high contribution counts. No sense revealing them yet.

I have serious knowledge and I have improved the Wikipedia in skeptical related articles in relation to fringe beliefs. Your statement we are all vandals or doing illegal activity is false.

I never said that. This kind of straw man argument is common for AP socks. However, impersonation to defame is illegal in the United Kingdom, where Darryl is presumed to live. The reports I was writing were about “Anglo Pyramidologist,” known to be two people. No claim was ever made that all activity was vandalism or illegal.

Take care and Good bye. My advise for you would be to give up. You are fighting a war you cannot win. You will never work out who I am or get rid of me from Wikipedia. Leon. [[User:From a tower|From a tower]] ([[User talk:From a tower|talk]]) 01:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I have already won, because my goal is not personal and I am not personally attached. My goal is for truth to out, and it does. I testify to what I know, when it has relevance to real issues. Wikiversity was lost, but …. it’s not over till it’s over, and I have only begun the process to address that. I wanted to research the issues in depth, and the exact nature of the corruption and disruption is becoming clear, it all fits together, and this is based on the verifiable evidence that I’ve been collecting. It is indeed a larger story than two crazy brothers. I had already abandoned Wikiversity for personal use, concluding that it was not safe from exactly the kind of disruption that appeared and demonstrated it. I was able to rescue all content of importance to me and others.

He did not abandon confrontation, he merely shifted tactics, and, I suspect, engaged his brother. The two of them could disrupt and claim that they were not the same person. Because they weren’t. Something shifted in the steward responses. For some time, all my requests were promptly actioned. Rather abruptly, that stopped and I was accused of filing frivolous reports. But they were not frivolous and were supported by an administrator. What had been a friendly environment on Wikiversity turned, almost overnight, into very hostile. How that happened was actually clear, the acting bureaucrat explained it.

Private complaints. Star chamber process, presented with plausible but highly misleading evidence, which is what the Smiths do on RationalWiki routinely.

Quack Hunter had previously written, on Wikipedia, when blocked for sock puppetry

Those accounts are not me, indeed I stepped in on the SPI because I knew it was filed as a joke.. There is four people editing from my IP address and one of them is a young family member who has a tendency to create sock puppets, joke accounts or edit silly articles in favor of fringe beliefs. If you look at my edits you will see I am not the same person. My account and the Steve account (another family member) are proper accounts. [[User:Quack Hunter|Quack Hunter]] ([[User talk:Quack Hunter#top|talk]]) 00:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

The Anglo Pyramidologist SPI 24 December 2014. is where Quack Hunter is shown as suspected. Remarkable there. Logos was suspected, and it is noticed that some likely socks had repeated Logos arguments. That is an AP behavior, I’ve seen it on RationalWiki. Socks appear, often with names designed to seem like they might be me (or even using my real full name), and vandalize and threaten users with legal action. Impersonation socking. Looking through this, I find many blatant AP disruptive user names, as appeared on Wikiversity and meta, found to be “Michael skater” socks. the same pattern had long existed on RationalWiki. Names like Jon Donnis Rome Viharo with an ectoplasm on top. I can show from other pages many names like this.

But the Quack Hunter account had not been created! What happened? Looking at the edits of the user who filed the case, they are missing. The SPI case pages are very poorly set up, and archiving process seems to be erratic. When cases are merged, it is copy and past, often, not an edit history merge. And when the original page is deleted, as these often are, the edit history is lost. Did the filer actually accuse an account that did not exist yet? Or was that added later in some edit to a deleted page? It’s a mess.

I could find no record of Quack Hunter “stepping in on an SPI.” There is no known Smith brother younger than Oliver and Darryl. There is an older brother, I won’t name.

The Anglo Pyramidologist SPI 10 June 2015. would ostensibly be the report of the identification of Quack Hunter, but he is not mentioned there. However, his edit to his talk page, linked above, was linked from it. It appears that he was blocked by Tiptoety

Quack Hunter went on:

The same thing happens every year Tipoety – I will give you one example, my previous account was Goblin Face  [link to Sockpuppet_investigations/Goblin_Face/Archive] highly respected Wikipedia account. Basically I am a hard working Wikipedia editor with decent contributions to this website.

This matches the opinion of self expressed by the checkuser-identified as an LTA, From_a_tower. GoblinFace may indeed be respected by some, but detested by others. I had noticed his activity before, but I was not editing Wikipedia and chalked it up as the usual usual there. He fitted into the antifringe faction (which often loses before the Arbitration Committee, whenever there is broad attention, but then acts to ban opponents.)

Outside of Wikipedia I own a skeptic website and I am a rather well known debunker of paranormal/pseudoscience claims.

So who is this? The well-known brother is Oliver D. Smith, but there is little on the twin brother Darryl L. Smith. “Debunker” is a point-of-view position. He is acknowledging pushing a point of view on Wikipedia and might even have a conflict of interest.

Every year my brother basically creates socks and messes around on this website ruining it for me in anyway he can – like I said unfortunately he always does this, he has a form of mental illness, I work and am not at home all day so I don’t truly know what he is up to.

Oliver D. Smith has acknowledged a schizophrenia diagnosis. There is a rumor of an anxiety disorder, which could go together with schizophrenia. However, the story told in 2011 in the original Anglo Pyramidologist sock investigation was a bit different. AP was interested in classics and Atlantis and has published a paper on Atlantis under peer review, and has a Wikia site on Atlantis. But Oliver is not known for crazy user names. He does create socks freely. I documented a recent series of them on Encyclopedia Dramatica, where he was attacking me.

He has a history of trolling the Atlantis article, insulting other editors, creating silly names or messing around on articles and other pseudohistoric related articles.

“Atlantis” would indicate Oliver. However, the “silly names” were used on Wikiversity and meta, attacking me for exposing impersonations designed to attack a user interested in parapsychology, and to attack the educational resource. This would not be Oliver, it would be Darryl. To be sure, the above was 2015, and the attacks were 2017. Maybe Darryl decided to adopt the Oliver strategy.

He repeatedly states to me he needs to be banned on Wikipedia because he can’t refrain himself from doing this.

I can believe it. However, being banned doesn’t stop him. He has continued to edit, I found socks referring to his published paper and there were recent socks tagged on matters of interest. He does create impersonation socks, but not the blatant, totally silly, obvious attack accounts. Just a bit more subtle.

Obviously I can’t win on this issue. All the accounts will be blocked even all the good stuff I do because of his vandalism, it has happened many times before.

This is bullshit. I wrote to Oliver Smith, when he was directly emailing me, that what he needed to do to clean up the whole mess was just to tell the truth. Darryl could have done the same thing, adding a few precautions, rather obvious ones. Don’t use the same computer and don’t edit from the same IP. In fact, the brothers did learn to use open proxies, but may occasionally slip and then they get tagged. But they are both defacto banned, each for what they personally did.

But you can easily see my editing from his if you spend honest time looking into the matter. Regards. I am not further responding. [[User:Quack Hunter|Quack Hunter]] ([[User talk:Quack Hunter#top|talk]]) 00:40, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I have spent a great deal of time since September, 2017, studying the edits of these brothers. It is not “easy” to distinguish them. Yes, there are certain characteristics that stand out, their interests, and mannerisms that create the “duck test.” But … there is crossover. Both brothers retreat behind a fog of lies and attacks and massive confusion. Quack Hnnter neverthless went on, with even more:

Basically the minority of skeptic accounts are all me, I don’t deny this I am a productive Wikipedia editor who opposes fringe beliefs and vandalism. I find Wikipedia is a useful website to debunk pseudoscience claims with decent references. But the joke accounts/ or accounts pushing fringe beliefs with silly names are not me. This can be easily proved. Look even at the log in times. He has attempted to pretend all the accounts are him to annoy me. I am ”’NOT”’ Anglo Pyramidologist  or any of [the] Bookworm44 socks. Look at my posts, I have debunked such crackpottery as pyramid power. I do not hold any fringe beliefs.

The accounts “pushing fringe beliefs” would generally be impersonation socks. Oliver was fringe on certain matters, before, but found his bread got more butter aligning with RationalWiki and the skeptic movement.These are all accounts to be blocked on Wikipedia, because they are socks of either Oliver or Darryl or impersonations of others, and the Wikiepdians don’t care.

It took me months to become familiar with this tangled mess. The original SPI case mentions the brothers, it appears that both brothers used

This is obvious: with the home situation described, don’t use IP!!! In that case, Darryl makes a complicated and difficult to read statement, a wall of text. He is describing the situation of his twin brother, Oliver. From what I have learned about the situation, Darryl was generally telling the truth, but that truth would also be likely to get him banned. He was about 20 or 21, and not well-educated. It is still unknown what education he has, but definitely, he is not a scientist, as he says, though as a RationalWiki editor he spouts off with ignorant opinions on science, and the same elsewhere.

The next filing, 15 June 2011, has more “brother” information. Back to what Quack Hunter wrote about his brother.

His statement here is not true [User_talk:Doug_Weller]. All the accounts under Anglo Pyramidologist/BookWorm44 are him, ”’not”’ me. I don’t mind you filing it all under Goblin Face – I guess you can’t be bothered to put his accounts under his and mine under mine so that won’t happen (it would be nice if you did though), but please put a message on there at least that there is two of us on the same IP i.e. on the sock puppet investigation page or put a link over there of my post here… I am definitely not him. I don’t particularly want all his crackpottery or loads of accounts filed under my username, but I guess that is what is going to happen. Please look into this, not just because you can’t be bothered and it is an easy block. I am telling the truth here. Regards. David. [[User:Quack Hunter|Quack Hunter]] ([[User talk:Quack Hunter#top|talk]]) 18:21, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

He might be telling the truth, but radically unskillfully. He calls himself “David,” which is not the name of any known Smith brother. With the “not true” comment, he is claiming that JohnJons is his brother. That obvious sock (but of whom?) JohnJOns lists a series of articles and accounts. Johnjons does not claim to be Oliver Smith. This would look more like an enemy, but surely Darryl would know. Unless Quack Hunter is an impersonation, which isn’t impossible.

But unlikely.

What JohnJons caaims:

Anglo_Pyramidologist is Goblin Face, just recently banned on a major sock farm. There are his banned socks logged under the same name such as Anglo Pyramidologist Returns. He’s been revisiting the British Israelism entry under different socks for years, and even speaking to you. The only difference is that he is now anti-BI, and people don’t recognize this. Some of his socks that edited the BI entry: AncientScribalPhiloSemiticGeekHerodotusReader. Note he was also on the Chronicles of Eri as IrishBookofInvasons and on Laurence Waddell on WaddellSumerianOldScrolls etc, as well as re-editing his old AngloP contributions such as Ethel Bristowe. As far as I’m aware no one has picked up on this, and not filed it under Anglo Pyramidologist. When this AngloP is banned he always uses the same excuse the socks are his brothers or sisters in his house. Its obvious though this is all one individual based on the edit history overlap. Also, between the Goblin Face and Anglo Pyramidologist sock archives, was another sock farm owned by AngloP: BookWorm44. If you look at edits, and account names they are connected. The only ‘missing year’ for AngloP is 2013. However it turns out at the start of that year he went to Metapedia, and became a sysop there for a short while (until Dec. 2013). On Goblin Face, various of his blocked socks have tried to remove the mention of “Atlantid” on the Metapedia entry here, including a sock called Atlantid. All the socks on the race talk page are the same person, i.e. AngloP (blocked under Goblin Face or “Quack Hunter” filed as a checkuser sock of Goblin) e.g. Ralph RoadrashPalaeoresearcher, etc. Note Atlantid/AngloP’s enemy is Mikemikev (formerly also) from Metapedia who he was debating on the race talk Wikipedia entry. In October 2014, it was AngloP on his sock FossilMad who reported and banned Mikemikev again for sockpuppetry. Atlantid/Anglo_Pyramidologist are confirmed to be the same editor off Wikipedia, but I won’t link to anything. This though can easly be confirmed by running google checks on both names. JohnJons (talk) 00:50, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

And another sock blocked. JohnJons is Goblin Face. Doug Weller (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

The block was issued by Tiptoety, checkuser. It is then likely that JohnJons is the same user as Quack Hunter. I find it unlikely that Oliver Smith would write the above description about himself. The Metapedia story is correct, I think. Bookworm44 appears to be an AP sock, probably Oliver.

But why would Oliver make the “single person” claim. And why would, then, Darryl care? There is a lot more to be found.

Skeptic from Britain

This Wikipedia account, contributions (account was renamed twice), was obviously Darryl L. Smith. See the subpage. Beyond the duck test (in itself obvious), I have strong and more direct evidence not shown there, based on what is verifiable, and will show this to anyone with an established identity who needs to know.

Psychologist Guy

This account has recently come under suspicion as being Darryl. The subpage will start to collect evidence relating to this. At this point, this is merely a suspicion, not considered proven beyond reasonable doubt. 

Correction invited

All pages on this blog invite correction. The easy way: comment on any page or post with comments enabled (sometimes “pages” don’t have comments enabled, but it’s quick for me to fix). Where interpretation is involved, alternate interpretations with any possible color of good-faith may be presented and would generally be published. Someone like Darryl Smith would be allowed to make a statement, for example. Use a real e-mail address, it will not be published unless the identity asserted is conclusively verified to be an impersonation.





Leave a Reply