If you are reading this on an archive site, be sure to check the original URL for possible updates, corrections, or retractions.
This is a commentary on Harassment. The claims here are in indented italics.
The harassment shown in the page supra came from one or more of these sources, in order of decreasing probability. my opinion:
- Darryl L. Smith
- Oliver D. Smith
- An impersonator, Oliver would probably claim mikemikev, which seems very unlikely to me, unless he has some alternate personality that I have not observed.
- Someone who has believed what the Smiths have claimed, and is also motivated to support the Cause. It is not impossible there is someone that stupid.
I’m placing my bets on Darryl L. Smith, because of history of apparent impersonation socking and vicious on-line attack, plus Oliver’s testimony about him, put together over a long time. Oliver recently claimed, however, that he lied since 2011 about the “brother.”
As to the claims, this review will be point-by-point.
Wed, Mar 28, 2018, “Paul Davies”
I am sorry to have to contact you. Is your [redacted] Abd ul-Rahman Lomax aka [full legal name including middle name redacted]?
From various impersonation socks on RationalWiki, I knew he had full doxx, which isn’t difficult for me since I have not hidden, and I’ve been active on-line since the 1980s. He starts with a lie, though (he’s not “sorry”) and ends with a lie (he is not “Paul”) with many more lies in the middle. That is totally SOP for the Smith brothers, both of them, who tell the truth when it is incomplete and appears to support whatever they want readers to believe — or when it is not important.
Your [redacted] is involved in some very dark and disturbing things on the internet.
I am. I was warned to stay away, by Darryl and others. From the ED article on Oliver D. Smith, a comment attributed to Junius Thaddeus:
I didn’t realize what I was getting into when I decided to document the activities of a psychopath. It’s just too much.
Originally I was just looking at Wikipedia activity, which was vicious, but not on the level of what appeared when I began to look outside the WMF wikis. It was like doing research in a sewer. I encountered many trolls and haters, sometimes often-blocked — but simply returning with more socks — or, in one case, effectively running the asylum.
For the last ten years he has been living a double life on the internet viciously attacking people and doxing people on his website.
Not even the
asylum RationalWiki article goes that far. I’ve been highly involved with controversy since the 1980s, but was not known for “attack” nor for “doxxing,” until very recently, with one example — quickly removed — and then Oliver and Darryl Smith, who routinely attack and doxx and have been doing so for years, Oliver is famous for it, but Darryl managed to hide. Or, as Oliver effectively has claimed recently, he was an inactive brother who simply did not object to Oliver pretending to be him. I don’t really care who is doing it, and will likely name both of them in forthcoming actions.
I have not been hiding my internet activity, my family knows my Muslim name, which is obvious if one checks. Every friend knows that name. “Double life” is stated because it seems reprehensible in some way.
The “website” he is referring to would be this blog, which was only started a little over a year ago.
He has been banned on 7 websites for harassing others [sic] users.
I can’t think of that many, but if you want to count WMF wikis, it would be technically 854 wikis, the only community bans would be one, with an additional admin indef block, never confirmed by the community. None of the blocks or bans show a reason of “harassing other users” (but that was claimed on RationalWiki). I had an account active on hundreds of WMF wikis, and was banned only on the English Wikipedia, and then, as a result of a situation which I am addressing through legal process, was blocked on Wikiversity (out of process) and then “San Fran Banned,” i.e., banned by the WMF office with no warning or explanation, so how would “Paul” know the reason? What he would know is that he is one of a handful who were canvassed or were canvassed to complain, pursuing old vendettas and grudges, because he was one of them, and very likely was in communication with others. This particular troll has enablers, and so an effective response must address them.
And I am blocked on RationalWiki, completely out of normal process. RationalWiki is a hive of Smith suckers. No others that I can think of. Not seven, but if one wants to count WMF wikis, it would be 855. Really, though, that is two bans, one about six years ago; the two others are “blocks,” which can be transient and any administrator may reverse.
Then I am currently “permabanned” on LENR Forum, for reasons not actually stated, but I declared I was boycotting that Forum because of unnecessary content deletion without notice or recourse, and was then banned. “You can’t quit, you’re fired!” Some people are like that. No other web sites that I can think of, and many, many where I’m in good standing.
Recently he has been publishing disturbing articles that defend pedophilia.
Nope. Not one. He’s simply lying, as he has similarly about many others. What he has pointed to is a comment I made that, were I an attorney, I might end up defending a pedophile. Or a rapist or murderer or a traffic offender or a racist or … shocking, I know … a Trump supporter or even a vicious internet troll like the Smith brothers. And then he has accused others of pedophilia with no evidence that makes any sense, and I’ve pointed that out, so he calls me a “pedophile defender,” thus occasioning the remark I made.
I am not sure if your [redacted] Abd Lomax is a pedophile but he has written articles defending pedophiles.
More accurately, defending a person against accusations of pedophilia, accusations based on evidence that, when examined in full, shows zero indication that the person is a pedophile, nor a “pedophile defender. Notice, here, that he attempts to raise suspicion that I am a pedophile. He is “not sure.”” If sane, he actually knows that what he is claiming is false, but he makes these claims because sometimes they cause people to react emotionally and to not see clearly. He actually gets away with this, way too often, because way too many people are readily manipulated through such appeals to hatred.
Or he is insane.
He says he has adopted two young children but I do not understand how he could be fit to be looking after a child. He has a very dark disturbing online presence and he is online nearly all day attacking other people. He is an online menace.
To be approved for international adoption, the mother and I went through very extensive investigation and vetting. The troll here could be Oliver, who is an “anti-natalist,” i.e., believes that having children is immoral and is full of hatred in many other ways. “Dark, disturbing” is a description of his mind. I document, and documentation of evidence is not “attack.” I was attacked for merely presenting evidence, originally with little in the way of conclusions. The more evidence I presented, the more severe and extensive the attacks, and then the RationalWiki article was written and there was an effort to get all my work deleted and me banned. And then the ban is cited as proof that I was harassing…. It’s circular, and obvious to anyone who looks at the evidence, and not to those who don’t. The world is like that.
There is a long article that factually documents your [redacted]’s internet abuse:
That was written by Darryl Smith as retaliation, as promised in sock edits on the meta wiki.
Your [redacted] uses the online username “Abd”. He has been globally banned on Wikipedia, Wikiversity and from the Wikimedia Foundation for harassing and attacking users.
I generally use that name, the Smith use many hundreds of names, sometimes many per day. There is only one “global ban,” from the Foundation, obviously based on private complaints, and it is routine that the target of a global ban is not told what the ban is for. I think they assume that someone extremely disruptive, which they claim is necessary for a ban, would know. But I did not violate the Terms of Service and was not disruptive, what I did was normal in dealing with long-term abusers. I think they accepted lies, but, of course, not knowing the actual content of the complaints, I don’t know.
Your [redacted] appears to be online almost everyday, all day doing this, it is not healthy.
If that was all I did, for sure, it could be deadly. He is, here, a “concern troll.”
I am reaching out to you in good faith.
He is lying. He is harassing similarly to what he has done with many others. Anyone who exposes what he has been doing, he harasses them directly, he contacts their families, he contacts their employers, and, in one particularly nasty piece of business, he contacted the employer of the mother of his target. When it was claimed that he had gotten her fired, he acknowledged the contact, but claimed he didn’t “get her fired.” I wonder, what, did he give her a commendation? Nice of him, right?
Is there any chance you can try and get him off the internet? There are people who are looking to take legal action against your [redacted] because of the defamation he has been posting on specific people for years.
“People.” And “for years”? Who? There will be legal action here, likely. The first demand letter went out today and I expect a few more will go out in the next few days. Apparently there has been legal action before, but it has been difficult to find details.
Your [redacted]’s block logs:
Those are not block logs, they are contribution logs. They also show the latest blocks and, in addition, global locks. I was most active on the meta wiki before the global ban. One of the likely complaints would have been about allegedly filing “frivolous requests” there, but I was not warned and was not blocked on the meta wiki, and most of the filings were actioned — uncovering extensive impersonation socking and disruption.
And the impersonator was what I have called an “attack dog” for a substantial faction on Wikipedia. So they protected him by attacking the one documenting the history.
I was blocked (it became a “community ban”) on Wikipedia since 2012, and had not edited there since then. I knew how to appeal (as a paid consultant, I advised others how to be unblocked — which is legal and not a violation of the TOS, and they were successful) but I did not appeal. I gave up on Wikipedia, and I had given up on Wikiversity, except for a little maintenance, two years ago. The wikis were dangerous, it was adequately demonstrated to me, content could be arbitrarily deleted without warning, and some personal attacks successfully resulted in bans of the target, when the attackers were far more disruptive. (I first saw this problem as far back as 2008, and successfully confronted some of the trolls.)
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_globally_banned_users (your [redacted] is on the global ban list)
Less than 30 people have been globally banned in the world by the Wikipedia Foundation. People only get globally banned for very serious criminal offenses.
That is false, and the WMF explicitly says that criminal offenses will be referred to the police, not handled by the WMF. I know many of the underlying situations for global bans, and “very serious criminal offenses” were not the normal cause. I can say for sure that the implication here, that I was guilty of some “very serious criminal offense” is completely false. I did not violate the Terms of Service, and nothing I did was criminal.
Your [redacted] was sending other users threats and posting in where they live on these Wikis.
I have not sent any users “threats.” I do not have any postings that show the home addresses of users. I did transcribe a screen shot from a wiki with home address information, using that to connect the two brothers — who some time ago lived at the same house, of their parents — but that was redacted within a day. What is left is the town in England, which is enough for the necessities of the reporting. Further, that “address” was a rural road, apparently, with no house number. It would not be enough by itself to find the residence. It might be useful for mail delivery, that’s about it.
You [sic] [redacted] gets banned on nearly every forum or website he joins.
From a small fraction of them! The troll here is blocked on many fora, but simply creates new accounts. In the last day, he created many accounts on Encyclopedia Dramatica, and he continually changes his accounts on RationalWiki. (Both Oliver and Darryl do this, but it is likely Oliver socking so extensively on ED.
He is involved in some very dark online activities and is known to create hundreds of accounts and impersonations of people to harass them.
That is him and not me. There are no examples asserted of me impersonating others. He writes above that I am known as “Abd.” What are the other names? I’ve used “Abdlomax” in a few places where Abd was already taken. “Is known.” By whom? This claim is not even in the RationalWiki hit piece.
Your family are probably not aware of this. He will no doubt deny any involvement to you or make up excuses for the Rationalwiki article factually documents his internet abuse and his block logs can be found. He has been doing it for years.
Doing what? The RationalWiki article does what many articles created by the brothers on RatWiki do: find some event that looks bad, if one squints, and then assert it as a pattern of behavior. Just the other day, Darryl Smith, as “Debunking spiritualism,” proposed a rewrite of the article because it was inaccurate, claiming that he had communicated with me by email. However, he did not disclose that he had written the article, which might have made a difference. Instead, he and his brother Oliver, (editing as Agent47), claimed that I had agreed to some “truce,” I’d stop mentioning them if they would get the article deleted. I had made no such agreement, and all the emails are shown on this blog. (And the emails had been, not with DS, but with Oliver.) As I’d have expected on RatWiki, the regular users were outraged at “caving in to blackmail.” But it was suggested that DS could still work on the article. Instead, he disappeared.
I mean your [redacted] no harm, I suspect your [redacted] has some sort of mental illness, I just wish he would help himself by getting off the internet. He has been defaming people online for years. He argues with people everyday and harasses them on his blog, I have never seen him type a nice comment to anybody online. I do not know your [redacted]’s real life history but if his internet activities continue he may end up in a lot of trouble.
I might even die eventually. It’s called life, and it ends. Again, there is no history of “defaming people.” I’ve been active on-line since the 1980s. This is all fabricated nonsense. I’m relatively active on Quora, with a strict Be Nice, Be Respectful policy, and I’m doing fine there, and am documentably appreciated.
I recommend that your warn your family about this. As of this month March, 2018, your [redacted] has been spamming Rationalwiki users abuse.
The “spamming” he would have in mind has been impersonation socking on RationalWiki, creating a username thought to look like something I would use, and then copying something I wrote, twisting it a bit to add threats or the like, and then using it to vandalize pages on that wiki. That’s quite similar to what they have done, and are still doing, on Wikipedia.
I would appreciate it if you would tell him to get off the internet, stop attacking our website and stop attacking people online.
He is an owner of RationalWiki? He does think of RW as his personal army, his attack platform, and he’s been heavily enabled there.
In any case, I’m a journalist, and I document what I find, where I consider it relevant to my key missions. I’m not easily bullied. In fact, I’ve never successfully been bullied. Many decades ago, I was cheated by a landlord, but I never took the matter to court. It’s one of the failures I regret. I don’t intend to repeat it. That landlord didn’t just cheat me, he cheated many. By not confronting it because it was “too much trouble,” I enabled him to continue. Confronting abuse is a collective responsibility, someone must do it, or society fails.
Thank you. I am not interested in email communication about this, I was just giving some friendly advice and trying to reach out to someone who knows him. He wont ever help himself, so maybe you could. Regards.
Of course he’s not interested in email communication. The mail is almost certainly fake. This was not friendly, that was just one more lie
In a personal communication like this, using a pseudonym is a lie. The recipient immediately saw through this, especially with the next message. I was called when the second message appeared, three weeks later.
Tuesday, April 17, 2018, “Matthew Philips”
From: [forward by redacted]
Date: Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 4:41 PM
Subject: [redacted] To: [redacted] Name: Matthew Philips
Email Address: email@example.com
Subject: Your [redacted]
Your [redacted] Abd Lomax ([legal name redacted]) spends all of his time viciously attacking people on the internet. He has been banned on many websites.[link to RationalWiki article on “Abd_ul-Rahman_Lomax”]
There are people looking to take legal against your [redacted] for harassment. Can you tell him to get offline? He is online pretty much all day attacking people. He owns a blog Cold Fusion Community that has hosted doxxing of people. Your [redacted] is now a poster on a pornographic racist website called Encyclopedia Dramatica.
No new lies here. However, ED is not accurately described as he did, and he has been posting there for years, and posts far more than I. I simply responded, recently, to comments he made about me, and this would be classic trolling: he trolls for responses and then if the person responds, condemns them for it. ED is a rowdy environment, an uncensored parody, and it parodies racism as well. There is a Wikipedia article on Encyclopedia Dramatica.
Oliver Smith made comments about me on a talk page there, so I registered an account and responded. In that sequence, he has created many sock accounts, promptly blocked as Smith, whereas I have only my original account. I have responded to Smith in a few places there. So far, I have not written articles there. To get an idea of what Smith does, see this post from the Encyclopedia Dramatica Forum. It could be worse. He also created a series of lulu books, fake, with impersonation authors. For one, the body is completely naked.
And this troll cries “harassment!” A “poster” on ED, with many, many posts and articles there, then uses response as “proof” of Bad Behavior.
ED is a parody site, with “fake” encyclopedia articles, saying about article subjects of whatever seems funny to the authors. They parody racism and anti-racism, in a very politically incorrect manner (lots of NSFW images, for example). Some sample articles: (Abbreviations: C, “created by,” E, “extensively edited by, RW, RationalWiki:)
Oliver D. Smith possibly C Mikemikev, E Junius Thaddeus, see below
Emil O. W. Kirkegaard C E Oliver see RW Emil Kirkegaard C E Oliver (originally “Emil O. W. Kirkegaard”)
Rome Viharo C E Oliver
(to be expanded)
for subreddit page http://archive.is/FweNh and https://www.reddit.com/r/rationalwiki/comments/4d17di/rationalwiki_turned_worse/
Smith socks on ED Forum: http://archive.is/wFrcz http://archive.is/6qEEv