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!

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., Ben Steigmann. But there are overlaps. Ben Steigmann, 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 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 know 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. 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 away 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.

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. One step at a time. I’ve been documentined 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 spirituality 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.)










Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress Anti Spam by WP-SpamShield