7 edits April 7, 2017, creating a new biography of Leonard Keene Hirshberg, which showed high experience. This was definitely not a new user. There were no more edits until 26 January 2019. This is sleeper account behavior. Darryl would be expected to create biographies of quacks, and Hirshberg was not a quack, yet a disgraced skeptic, and this was significant to PG. Darryl would have high interest in Eusapia Palladino. Prior recognizable Darryl accounts that edited the Palladino article included
General comments: My overall conclusion has become that there are two Smith brothers, in spite of some claims that this is only one user. The posting habits are quite visibly different. There is a set of special interests and the pattern is to register an account and immediate start promoting those very particular interests.
AP/A (generally open about his identity) is promoting his idiosyncratic views with highly repetitious argument, visible over many accounts, over time, but often based on RationalWiki articles that he wrote. AP/A (see comments below) denies that most accounts are him, but has never been explicit about what actually is him. He is now banned on RationalWiki, under the user name Aeschylus. He wrote the RW articles on Emil Kirkegaard (as (BenSteigmans — an impersonation) (and is in court in the U.K. over defamation of Kirkegaard. His views on Kirkegaard are extreme extrapolation from thin evidence, often cherry-picked and taken out of context. He also wrote the article on Noah Carl (as Octo). Favorite targets include Kirkegaard, me, Arthur and Emblyn Kerensa, (RationalWiki techs who confronted him), and he is obsessed with Michael Coombs (who does actually harass him). Oliver Smith is welcome to present “his side of the story,” with “evidence,” as he claims “people believe.” I’d provide a page for it, at least.
AP B, apparent twin brother of AP/A, who has claimed that “there is no brother,” then explained that he does have a brother, but he is not active on the internet, and that his earlier references to his brother were lies. This is unlikely, given the behaviors seen. AP B (the alternate personality of Anglo Pyramidologist) became an anti-pseudoscience activist, and I became involved when he attacked the real Steigmann with impersonation accounts on Wikipedia, creating angry response to this user on Wikiversity. When I exposed this with requests for steward checkuser, and started to investigate what had happened, I became a new favorite target, and AP B created the RationalWiki article on me, — which they often cite — as Marky and many other accounts, and hosts of impersonation and trollsocks followed.
AP B also visibly coordinated complaints to the WikiMedia Foundation, with which Oliver cooperated, resulting in an office ban in early 2018, and I’m in U.S. Federal court over that. Not over the ban itself, but over publication — and the conspiracy to defame that was behind it.
AP/A is promoting a serious agenda of his own, and is persistent. Accounts he creates on Reddit tend to be used for a few days, with extensive posting, then the accounts are deleted, making it difficult to track. I tag these accounts for that reason, it makes them trackable even if the account is deleted.
AP B creates attack socks, promoting the Smith party line on targets, trollsocks, making sometimes scatological or blatantly offensive comments to derail discussions, and impersonation socks. Manul was, for example, a favorite name for him to use, as an impersonation of the Wikipedia user. Impersonated, in January, were an alleged ex-wife of mine (invented), Graaf Statler (also WMF office-banned), and MiisterMagico (a Wikipedia user), and perhaps others. AP B’s accounts typically make one or a few edits and are replaced by more accounts. This pattern has often been seen on RationalWiki. I was impersonated with many accounts, and that continues.
The Smiths in general promote highly deceptive defamation, and anyone who points that out fact on this is attacked as “supporting” alleged political positions of the defamed people. So here, for example, there is no evidence that, when examined fully, supports the claim that Emil Kirkegaard is a “child rape apologist,” but that story is repeated over and over. And in some places, readers buy it and react as if it is true.
The Smiths continue these behaviors because they work.
I began tagging all these accounts last year, and collected them from September on, on the page linked above. I do not argue with trolls. I respond to regular users who raise issues. Remarkably, I tag all throwaway accounts in threads that are called to my attention, and they claim that these obviously verifiable claims are “lies.”
It is not claimed here that every throwaway account found is a Smith. There are occasional impersonations, but the bulk and the flow is obvious, if studied. On Wikipedia, accounts like these would be immediately blocked as socks by the “duck test.”
AP/A (Oliver D. Smith)
Hereditarianism or “race realism” (not the same as racism but associated)
Emil Kirkegaard and others
Anyone reporting his activities:
Many others, for a time
AP/B (Oliver’s twin brother)
Psychics or Parapsychology
Fringe or emerging science (often called pseudoscience)
Skepticism of mainstream beliefs about diet, health, medicine
“Believers” in any of these things.
Anyone who identifies his patterns and reports them, as
MartinaLomax Yes, it’s quite safe to ignore Abd (Dennis Lomax). He’s my ex husband and I’m afraid he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. The Cross affair was big news a few months ago. It was reported in several major news outlets. Dennis doesn’t know this because he’s too busy lying about his failed career. Some commentators believe Philip Cross may be affiliated to (and funded by) Mr Jimmy Wales. phillip-cross-the-mystery-wikipedia-editor-targeting-anti-war-sites/250824/
14:19:16 5 Mar 2020 WiA OP “Dennis Lomax (ABD) has been blocked again”[deleted as spam]
Because many throwaway socks are trolling, and DNFTT is standard advice, but also because documenting these accounts can be useful, my practice is to not respond to or argue with trolls, except that, because many of these vanish and then the patterns cannot be seen, I tag them with the user name and “throwaway account.”
I only tag these accounts in related threads where the trolling behavior is clear. Mention of an account here is not a claim, in itself, that an account is any particular individual, but the vast majority of these accounts are, from behavior, Smith socks.
I will answer questions and generally respond to comments from regular redditors, or other accounts that do not appear to be trolling.
This is a list of accounts alleged to be socks of Michael Coombs (Mikemikev), by Oliver D Smith, on RationalWikiWiki, archived here.
… and then tagged by me as possibly Oliver D. Smith himself. See the page supra. New comments in italics.
ANTIFAGuy agenda OS. Oliver has objected strongly to this because he is not “antifa,” but this is an account name, not a disclosure of account politics. Nevertheless, “Guy” in user names is a common Darryl Smith practice. I’ll stand with this possible identification, though from agenda and many details. In any case, not Mikemikev, no resemblance to Coombs patterns.
Apso2 OS [antiracialist, opinion appears to be Oliver’s, based on National Front comment. Not proof.]
Arcticosopenly Oliver, and see involvement with Smith agenda re me.
Bertha_Hues likely OS [re-examining, I doubt this one, but then looked at the “signal.” I’ll stand with “likely.”]
CharlieBass. looks like OS but I’m not certain. (no change)
Cheeese. Very probably OS, but only one edit. Change “probably” to “likely.”
Dan Grimy. From argument, OS Very much OS by argument.
Dr. Witt.notice his last edit. If this is not Oliver, it would be Darryl. But the interests were those of Oliver.
EgalitarianJay. OS started Coombs article full edit history backs that this is definitely not Mikemikev and could easily be Oliver.
Gelzerundeleted contributions show Oliver agenda. Last contributions were trolling, massive attack on Mikemikev. This was not Mikemikev. Such trolling, though, is not common for Oliver. For sysops: DeletedContributions/Gelzer
Igobymanynames.vitriolic troll but might be independent. Not Mikemikev.
SchizophreniacOliver has explicitly denied this account, claiming this was Mikemikev, but it’s not plausible. Quite some time after making edits that reflected Oliver interest, the account created a bio of Oliver on RatWiki, which was the kind of bio that Oliver would write about himself, rationalizing his views. It was not like other attack bios created by others.
Schizophrenicthis account was active from Jan to Sept 2016, with clear Oliver interests. The name would be sarcastic, long story. See here where that account was covered in detail, long ago. This was Oliver, there is no room for reasonable doubt. The account was blocked, 16 months later, as impersonation, by Debunking Spiritualism in his last flame-out. He was clearly Oliver’s brother Darryl (“DS”) , and he cited the blog page. But as is typical with links to this blog from the Smiths, an archive of a category display was used, which will rapidly become useless.
Scythesreviewing this, weak or incorrect. Without more detailed research, I am not confirming this, and it might be Mikemikev in a relatively sober moment. The account was short-blocked and went away.
TunaI’ll tag this “probable.” Possible crossover interests with Darryl.
WelliverThis account was my first RatWiki tie-in to the impersonation socking on WMF wikis. One of the globally locked users uploaded an image of John Fuerst to Commons, and it was promptly used by Welliver on RatWiki. When I tagged that image on Commons, it was deleted and that caused an image on RatWiki to fail. You can see in my first edit to RatWiki in three years, at that time, what I’d found. The WMF account Englisc was globally locked. The RatWiki account only had that one edit; I’m convinced that Englisc was Oliver. Oliver had a strong interest in John Fuerst. There is still some mystery here, to me. I suspect steward checkusers seeing some connection between Oliver and Darryl, which happened before. All it would take is a visit to him of Darryl. I have some methods for sock identification that I have not applied in this case, yet.
Bottom line, these accounts were all listed as Mikemikev by Oliver. Oliver claims that only one was his (but does not specify which one). That is implausible, and he has lied about accounts before. Yet even if he is not lying, this would not make these accounts be Mikemikev, which is radically implausible. (And many accounts appear to be his brother from known Darryl interests.)
So Oliver has accused Mikemikev of being the owner of *many* accounts which were not his. Some of the accounts appear to be Mikemikev and those have been noted. There may be others possible. The Smith brothers created an enormous smokescreen and then blame everyone else for confusion. Many people, particularly article targets, were blocked on RatWiki because of Smith impersonation and trollsocking. All Oliver seems to care about is alleged “errors.” He ignores the substance.
(The impersonation socking may indeed not be Oliver, that was his brother’s MO.)
Daniel Brandt wrote:PS: found on the TJC, a fresh new example of Oliver Smith and Mikemikev screaming at each other. Ugh. Get a room, you idiotos.
I’d noticed Oliver’s contributions as Evil, restoring the only mention of “Abd ul-Rahman Lomax” on the site, last I looked. All that had come down in late 2017 and early 2018. There is distinct difference between Mikemikev and Oliver. Miki is a racist troll, Oliver is just an insane troll. Oliver is substantially more persistent than Mike. Much of what he wrote there is either lies or insanity. ED went back up October 7, 2019, from the account creation log, creation times. Contributions are linked. Judgments from edits and timing are mine. Corrections, especially with evidence, welcome.
03:24, 12 October 2019Evil [Oliver] week block 06:42, 12 October 2019 12:27, 12 October 2019Evil2 [Oliver] indef bl. 14:41, 12 October 2019 13:11, 12 October 2019Evil3 [Oliver] indef bl. 06:42, 12 October 2019 18:28, 12 October 2019Mikemikev1488 [Mikemikev — likely] indef 18:45, 12 October 2019 19:57, 12 October 2019EDadminsarekikes [Mikemikev — possible] indef 20:13, 12 October 2019 18:42, 13 October 2019Evil4 [Oliver] indef. 14:52, 14 October 2019 19:36, 13 October 2019UnblockMikemikev indef 20:05, 13 October 2019 01:04, 14 October 2019The Adolf Hitler indef 01:57, 14 October 2019 01:19, 14 October 2019Mikemikev Legion indef 01:57, 14 October 2019 01:29, 14 October 2019Mikemikev Kike Destroyer indef 01:58, 14 October 2019 01:34, 14 October 2019Himmler indef 01:59, 14 October 2019 19:54, 17 October 2019Mikemikev 88 ? indef 21:42, 17 October 2019 19:59, 17 October 2019Mikemikev will shut down ED [not blocked]
20:04, 17 October 2019Antifa Cuck Yellowbird indef 21:41, 17 October 2019 20:07, 17 October 2019User account ED pathological liars indef 20:53, 17 October 2019 20:13, 17 October 2019Mikemikev destroys antifa bastards indef 21:37, 17 October 2019 11:24, 29 October 2019RapMetalSucks [not blocked]
17:17, 6 November 2019 MrAlex [not blocked]
23:01, 7 November 2019Mr Green [Oliver probable] [no block]
23:36, 12 November 2019Mikemikev2019 indef 23:41, 12 November 2019 23:41, 12 November 2019FakeAbd [renamed from Abd — I was asked] [not blocked]
23:49, 12 November 2019Fuck racists indef 23:53, 12 November 2019 23:54, 12 November 2019Mikemikev owns you [no contr.] indef 23:54, 12 November 2019 23:56, 12 November 2019Steve Coons [not blocked]
23:58, 12 November 2019Up urs indef 00:00, 13 November 2019 00:06, 13 November 2019Graaf Statler [not blocked]
01:57, 13 November 2019 Abd [this is actually me]. [no contr.] [not blocked]
01:46, 23 November 2019Mikemikev2020 indef 02:05, 23 November 2019 00:14, 26 November 2019ODS [Oliver] blocked 00:56, 26 November 2019 02:11, 26 November 2019ODSII [Oliver] indef 02:35, 26 November 2019 02:45, 26 November 2019ODSIII [no contr.] [Oliver] indef 02:52, 26 November 2019 02:56, 26 November 2019TRFan [Oliver] indef 03:02, 26 November 2019 13:15, 26 November 2019TR [Oliver] indef 16:16, 26 November 2019 00:03, 28 November 2019TRII [Oliver]
Key: clearly Oliver D. Smith / likely Mikemikev. / impersonations & trollsocks
It is possible that some accounts identified as trollsocks or impersonations were actually Mikemikev. I have not reviewed all contributions in detail.
[I wrote “possible.” Mikemikev commented below that these were not him. With that, I now consider it unlikely that any of the accounts were him, including the ones marked “likely.” Reviewing them, they don’t match known Mikemikev behavior.]
These patterns are very familiar. When a Smith target actually edits, they will bury it with impersonations and trollsocks. The accounts that registered in proximity to the fake Abd are quite unlikely to be Mikemikev. The long-term impersonation and troll-socker was Oliver’s brother, Darryl L. Smith, but it is possible that Oliver has taken up the behavior.
And now, the upshot: in the RationalWiki article on me, one of the proofs that I’m a troll was that I was banned on Encyclopedia Dramatica. Now the proof will be that I am not blocked on Encyclopedia Dramatica.
(I was never banned, but one account was blocked for a time, unblocked before the site went down. Oliver has been indef blocked on maybe hundreds of accounts. I don’t recall the level of trollsocking seen here, from before. It was just Oliver insisting on “never gonna shut me up.” Mikemikev accounts showed up, and were clearly identifiable. Once or twice Darryl showed up. Clear, not denied until much later.)
[update: from my single comment responding directly to Oliver on a user page where I expect I was welcome, I was blocked by an unknown admin on ED. We will see if that stands. I certainly don’t need to edit ED! — I was unblocked.]
October 1, 2019, a rash of trollsocks appeared on RatWiki, some may be considered impersonations. The targets: Smith targets. It’s clear to me that Karlin has been impersonated. I suspected it when I saw the account names, these were classic Smith trolling. However, what nailed it for me: the copying and spamming of text from Karlin’s blog, The RationalWiki Hit Piece on Anatoly Karlin.
This is exactly what the Smiths did to RatWiki with text from my blog with tacked in personal attacks on various RatWiki users, and legal threats, both with me and with him.
(Karlin is in error about some aspects of the situation; for example, his confusion of EK with Arthur Kerensa is naive, and he cites an EK satirical essay, apparently not realizing it was satire)
SS [could be Mikemikev but any of many others, possibly but not necessarily Nazi]
One of the redacted names (repeated in various forms) is that of one of my daughters, a minor. The other is the man who was impersonated by Darryl Smith on Wikipedia, creating massive disruption, and that is how I became a target of the Smith brothers, by exposing that.
These trolls are vicious. There is no threat to sue Rats, other than Darryl and Oliver Smith. (Oliver is already sued by Kirkegaard, and my lawsuit is awaiting a judge’s decision before I go ahead and amend the complaint properly, adding new defendants and serving them.) And I have never threatened to sue on that wiki, all those threats and claims that Bongolian was John66, all that, were from Darryl Smith. It’s an old behavior.
If I wanted to be unblocked on RatWiki, I know how to request it. And it certainly would not be this way!!! It appears that the Rats think this was me. I expect more intelligence from Rats. Some of them actually do know what’s been happening, but it does not get talked about because the Smith name must be protected!!! Or else!!!
Follows the same pattern: after blocked for socking, Lomax tries to blame his socks onto the Smith’s. He’s already made a blog post, doing exactly that.
And also for reference: Abominable (not me for sure, this was some kind of assumption by Oxyaena for unexplained reasons) was blocked at 12:50, 14 September 2019. Another account was created at 13:12, 14 September 2019, unblockabdnow. This was obviously an attempt to create a confirmation that Abominable was me. But I’ve been blocked on RatWiki since 2017, why would I suddenly make a stupid, useless account like that? I have good communication with privileged RatWiki users, I would not use some trolling sock to request unblock if I wanted it. Greentreeblue was here with this post 11 minutes after Abominable was blocked, crowing about the alleged Abd sock. Someone was watching all that very, very closely, ready to pounce. In the past, this behavior has been associated with the person being all sides of the mess. (creating impersonation accounts and then blocking them and then listing them as my accounts) In this case, Oxyaena is not suspected of being a Smith sock, not even close.
As to my blog, I had a page pointing to some edits on that article, with suspected sock accounts. That page has since been edited, but I’m going to take it back to what it was when the post above was written, the version of (13 Sep @ 21:14 GMT-4) and archive it, so that we can see if this Smith sock was referring to anything other than his own activity. Done, archived. No mention of any sock even remotely suspected of being me, mention of many socks and suspected socks identified by Rats as Oliver Smith. No mention of Abominable, created at 12:34, 14 September 2019, a single edit at 12:37, blocked at 12:50, and the trollsock was here at 13:01. Duck test, this was a single person with an agenda.
The usual: the trollsocks are lying. And they keep using new accounts to make it difficult to track them, which is why I compile lists like this. These are people who attempt to avoid personal responsibility, while attacking others viciously.
There are many accounts that will be added, but to start this page:
Identified or suspected Oliver Smith socks on RationalWiki:
Some accounts or IP addresses listed here may be impersonations, there are signs of that. Because Oliver Smith does not have an “official” account commenting (which would need to be off-wiki, and proven to be him by, for example, using the known Oliver Smith email) it is difficult to distinguish real from fake, but accounts reasonably believed to be Oliver — and claiming it — are denying being the IP trolls. It’s plausible. The impersonations take material that looks like Oliver material, and spam it. That is what was done on RatWiki with me.
Trollsocks are suspected of being impersonations. Against this idea is that Oliver, who could communicate authentically, does not disavow them promptly. Mikemikev, the most likely impersonator, would be unlikely to attack Wyatt. “Unlikely” does not mean “impossible.
The breadcrumbs led me to a Smith sock on Stormfront. Pure Smith. Nobody else would consider “finding 15-year old girls attractive” to be “self-confessed pedophilia.” The guy has no life, no idea of what normal sexuality is like, at almost 30. That was Mikemikev and he also said he wouldn’t touch them because he has ethics. Precisely — we hope. That, however, depends on context, in some cultures a sexually mature person is eligible for marriage, age is irrelevant. They don’t care about age. This has nothing to do with a paraphilia. Mike wasn’t even confessing a paraphilia (it would be ephebophilia, if it were exclusive attraction). The “common usage” of pedophilia can be a denial of normal sexuality, which is weird, but it happens. “Attraction” is normal, but it is also normal not to mention it. The source cited by Wikipedia (my emphasis): Q. Generally when you read or hear in the news about “pedophilia,” aren’t the media using the term to refer to anyone who is a minor? A. Yes. Generally, people use the term “pedophilia” to include ephebophilia. Most men can find adolescents attractive sexually, although, of course, that doesn’t mean they’re going to act on it.
Looking for what is mentioned, evidence that Wyatt was BjornStronginthearm. I find this post that made the claim without evidence, 14 Nov 2018. User SythonFilter, started this thread, Smith flags: UK and BNP and, down the page, UKIP. Sythonfilter is called “Matthew Collins” and “Francis.” Maybe, maybe not. Nationalist. So this really could be Oliver. Active 6/8/2016 until 7/2/2016, 69 posts. Upplysning tagged SythonFilter as Oliver (i.e., Atlantid), confirmed by BjornStronginthearm in a reply.
Another probable Oliver Smith sock on Stormfront: AngloCornish, joined in 2006, only other creator of threads on Rightpedia. BjornStronginthearm tagged AngloCornish as Oliver in 2017.
It does appear plausible that BjornStronginthearm is Wyatt of Rightpedia, but the intense interest is Oliver obsession, long-term.
and all this led me to BillConservative on Conservapedia, creator of the Rightpedia article there, then edited by a series of Smith impersonation trollsocks (and others). Troyer was probably Oliver as well, crowing about Rightpedia being taken down.
Unblockabdnow, from timing, was obviously created to amplify the impression that Abominable was me. Darryl does stuff like this. I rather doubt Mikemikev would do it.
Mr D/EK you are very friendly with Mr A-B-D and he told you on discord to remove it (I have seen your discord chats with A-B-D). Mr A-B-D defends the alt-right and he is close friend of Kirkegaard, so he wants criticisms of Kirkegaard removed. Kirkegaard wants to legalize incest and A-B-D is embarrassed about this because he has defended Kirkegaard for the last year, so he wants Kirkegaard’s blog post hidden. Mr A-B-D also blogged about IPs editing this article which he incorrectly accuses being one person. Stop the pretending, this is all A-B-D’s doing, nobody else. You did not just randomly log in here and not like an edit, LOL. But sure the autism stuff should be deleted but the incest and rape comments should all be put back. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Emil Kirkegaard wants to legalize incest and he thinks incest is perfectly morally acceptable in a sexual relationship – that is irrational and wrong. You yourself (D) a male pretend to be EK a female over the internet, and according to users on a forum that have looked into your activities you are a trying to be transsexual and are very confused about your sexuality so maybe you support incest. But 99% of people in the world do not support it. It should not be “legalized” or promoted as a good thing. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:40, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Other mods can perhaps intervene. EK is totally unhinged. This isn’t the first time they’ve falsely accused someone of an “ism” or “phobia”.Loch (talk) 19:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I’m not the IP editors. IP-editing doesn’t fit my behaviour at all; I’ve only used accounts. Unless you’re claiming my behaviour has suddenly changed to IP editing randomly after more than 7 years, why? I claimed you’re unhinged because you falsely accuse people of “isms” & “phobias”. There is no “ableism” in my edit(s), elsewhere you also falsely accused me of “transphobia”. I can only take that as a sign you’re a compulsive liar since nowhere have I ever written anything about transexuals on the internet, so how am I a transphobe? You make up total BS about people.Sea (talk) 20:25, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
EK/D are both the same person on this website (although D pretended to have quit). EK is very friendly with A-B-D and regularly talks to him everyday on multiple discords. A-B-D is in regular communication with Kirkegaard. A-B-D converted EK to his side because they were both globally banned on Wikipedia. A-B-D is having a negative influence here and gives in to A-B-D’s demands. EK/D should be cooped. (@David Gerard, Make it happen. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I use one Discord server only and D (Arthur Kerensa) is not active there every day. I occasionally receive email from Kirkegaard, perhaps every few months, but he did not inform me of the editing in question. D did retire, has no contributions or logged actions since then. (EK removed sysoprevoke he had created and restored his rights, but there has been no explanation of this that I’ve seen.) I don’t make demands, and did not request action. The IP says as if fact what he does not know, which is like lying.
D/EK – Abd was originally attacking you, he even created a blog post monitoring your activities. You only became friends with him around June 2019 because you are both globally banned on Wikipedia and you support his lolsuit against the WMF (you regularly post on wikipediocracy in regard to Abd’s lolsuit which you seem to support). Your edits on his RW article about the alt-right cult were made on 11 April 2019, long before you became friendly with him. And no, you wouldn’t try and remove that now because David Gerard does not like A-b-d so you would not try and white-wash criticisms from his article, it would like suspicious for you. A-b-d has been defending you on Reddit and on his blog, and on Reddit you keep defending him. I also don’t see why you have to pretend to be female on here or use two accounts D and EK. We all know who you are. As for discord logs, I have screenshots and I could easily email RW staff that reveal you and A-B-D regularly communicate and support each others agendas. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:31, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I’m not at all interested in the Abd drama and some of these Ips flooding this page could be Michael Coombs that are derailing the actual dispute. A sysop should just restore the incest and rape posts — we all actually know the real reason those were removed.Giant (talk) 20:40, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Just to point out the other IPS are not me. I added the original Kirkegaard incest blog post where he said he wants to legalize incest, a few days ago. It is relevant. Can a mod restore the said content. Thanks. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
D/EK same person
D/EK on RationalWiki are both the same person in real life, it is the same guy who likes to pretend to be female. He was globally banned on Wikipedia using D and EK accounts traced to the same IP. D has also admitted to being EK on Reddit. This person EK is now friendly with a-b-d and communicates with him on the Wikipediocracy discord, where a-b-d tells him to remove criticisms from certain article. EK even made a-b-d an admin on that discord. They are also on an email chain list together. EK needs to be cooped. His has a secret agenda and is damaging this website in various discord chats. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
(Above spammed to 7 user talk pages, probably with the same message as put on David Gerard talk a few minutes earlier (suppressed by DG).
About my communication with D (Dysklyver, Arthur Kerensa) and EK (Emblyn Kerensa?)
I have never told them what to do on RatWiki. They sometimes read this blog and I have linked to it at times. I don’t personally care what is in the Kirkegaard article, other than having noted in the past that the accusations there are grossly distorted. But for my own purposes, it’s better that the defamation be there, it strengthens Kirkegaard’s case against Oliver Smith. But it is better for RatWiki that ungrounded defamatory material be removed, and I presume that any action taken by D or EK is according to their perception of benefit to that project and community. They are highly trusted there, and keeping a trust is what I have come to expect from them.
I am not on any email list with either of them. I never attacked Dysklyver, but documented him on this page. Simple reporting of open fact, to the Smiths, is “attack.” In any case, Dyslyver saw that page and commented, and that was the beginning of our communication. He is not globally banned by the WMF, nor is EK. There is a lock, but a lock is not a ban. He would be free to create a new account. EK commented on Wikipediocracy in the thread on my lawsuit; as I recall, we had no communication before then. Oliver then attacked EK with the socking claim, which sealed his ban from RatWiki.
I was invited to join the Wikipediocracy Discord, and that is where I was given mod status. Nice people!
Why were legitimate edits removed from Emil Kirkegaard article? see for example 18.104.22.168 that added an incest and rape post to controversies. Questioner (talk) 18:01, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
You should ask the person who made the removal (@EK) on the talk page for that article first (Talk:Emil Kirkegaard). Bongolian (talk) 18:06, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Questioner – EK/D are both the same person. He has become friendly with a-b-d on the Wikipediocracy discord and a-b-d is friends with Kirkegaard and told EK/D to remove it (all three of them are banned on Wikipedia). No legit reason to remove that material. It is a-b-d’s doing. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:11, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Yea I noticed Abd’s blog wrongly claims (without any evidence) 141.98 is Smith. Abd on discord then got EK to remove it. However those IP edits aren’t by Smith. Questioner (talk) 18:16, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Emil Kirkegaard talk-page is locked. IP/S and new users cannot edit there. A-b-d is doing a lot of damage to RationalWiki off-site, people should not side with him here or give in to his demands, he has EK now on his side. [ping]David Gerard – EK/D is now very friendly with A-b-d and both of them communicate with Kirkegaard, you need to be careful about this. It is damaging RW article content. There is no reason to remove any of that content, only because a-b-d blogged about it. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
D/EK are both the same person (very friendly with a-b-d who told him to come here to remove content from Kierkegaard’s article) and according to various sources online EK is trying to be a transsexual in real life. D/EK is obviously very confused about his own sexuality, he pretends to be female on here and has been dressing up as a female in real life, even though he is male. He shouldn’t be discussing sexual subjects because he doesn’t know what the majority think about these topics or what is socially acceptable. He’s got odd-ball views. Legalizing incest is not acceptable, Kirkegaard is wrong and irrational. We don’t need EK to pretend otherwise. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
They’re not the same person. — OxyaenaHarass 21:09, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
[ping]@Oxyaena Why is EK making up outright lies? They just claimed virtually every poster on this wiki has “threatened them with murder and rape them” – an obvious falsehood with of course no evidence. I certainly haven’t. Some mentally unstable people like EK have a huge victim-playing complex. Additionally, they lied and said I created transphobic articles/Reddit threads about D. No idea what they’re talking about. EK is a disturbing case of a pathological liar, they seem incapable of ever telling the truth.Legend (talk) 21:20, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Oxyaena – D/EK are both the same person. On Reddit D after being questioned he has admitted in his own words EK is him. He is an individual who likes to pretend to be a female online. He was globally banned on Wikipedia, using both D and EK usernames both traced exactly to the same ip. There are no public records or birth records for EK, but you can find them for D. They are both the same person. This said person has now sided with a-b-d. Sometimes online D/EK he identifies as pansexual or transsexual. It is one person. You will never see them online at the same time talking. Ask to have a phone call with both this people or a skype, there will never be two people, impossible. It is the same guy. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
There is a similarity here between this interchange and the recent Reddit trollsocking. Oliver did appear there claiming to be Oliver, and many throwaway accounts showed up, hiding identity and being highly disruptive, with Darryl Smith agenda, apparently. Here, though, Mikemikev impersonation could be suspected, though it would be a lot of trouble for little or no gain. Oliver is banned, and it was originally because of his attacks on EK and Dysklyver. While he claims not to be the IP, he does not actually distance himself from the IP claims.
EK ascribes behavior to Oliver that might not have been him, but it is not clear. One thing that is clearly going on is that the Rats have lost all patience with Oliver.
Long-term, and commonly when the Smiths are involved in some way, massive impersonation and trollsocking appears. Oliver has always denied that this is him. He implied at one point that it might be his brother. Oliver has never supported the development of clarity; if, say, Emil Kirkegaard was impersonated, he could have known but never confronted it. Further, he also just referenced why Emil Kirkegaard was blocked: for outing. What outing? Well, Kirkegaard had no idea of the history, and discovered the socking, and mentioned it. He was, after all, being attacked by Oliver (and Oliver later acknowledged creation of the Kirkegaard article). He did not know that there was a Rule Zero on RatWiki: thall shalt not mention Smith. Not even indirectly. It was heavily and intensely enforced, for years.
As for blocks, I’ve only ever supported blocking if someone did harassment such as doxing or serious threats; this explains for example Emil Kirkegaard‘s ban.
This set off the klaxon. This is actually beautifully clear, and shows the relationship of Oliver and his brother. Did Oliver know what his brother did? I have seen again and again that Oliver appears to believe what is convenient for his world-view, and his view is that Kirkegaard is insane and thus could do almost anything, including, say, impersonating himself, and lying about it. Oliver actually claimed that he did not know his brother’s accounts, but he also complained about the doxxing of his “family” on this blog, and the only other member of his family relevant would be his brother. Truth will out, and he lied about there being no brother, though sometimes he modified that to claim that his brother doesn’t know what is going on, while, at the same time claiming that the goal here is to harass by Google. I.e., supposedly, this is all designed to defame Darryl L. Smith, who is completely innocent and doesn’t even know about it.
It takes a certain kind of mind to invent these possibilities, and to apparently believe them. Or he is simply lying, and we already know that he lies — or so so delusional that he doesn’t remember what he wrote and claims that reports of it are “lies.”
What happened with Kirkegaard? He described what he saw on his RatWiki user page. It was not doxxing, it was listing accounts that were clearly acting in a consistent way. This began at 01:09, 19 October 2017. Kirkegaard listed Skeptical among the accounts. He was wrong, but it was an error that many made. Skeptical was not the one who created his article. He had edited it, though.
01:15, 19 October 2017 Skeptical deleted a revision. But what revision? Normally, in my experience, the current revision cannot be deleted, one would revert or edit the page to remove offensive material, then hide what is now not the current revision. At this point, there were only two revisions; the first one created by Kirkegaard by IP, then the second. So there is a mystery here. The deletion summary is “edit summary hidden and username hidden” but the hidden edit summary was the 1:16 edit below.
01:16, 19 October 2017, Emil edited the page to add an off-wiki account clearly impersonating him. The edit summary was (Impersonators and harassment), hidden by Skeptical. (I have previously seen 1-minute glitches in edit timing, this looks like one.)
01:16, 19 October 2017, Skeptical unhid the user name. He’s going to complain, so he wanted it easily visible, my interpretation. The edit summary: (doxxing, posting false allegations about Rationalwiki editors)
01:17, 19 October 2017, Skeptical blocked EmilOWK. (more doxxing from Emil, including links to real peoples names and IP addresses.)
01:20, 19 October 2017Skeptical reverted and hid the user’s revision. (doxxing, links to real names and IP addresses)
01:21, 19 October 2017 Skeptical hid again, unclear what, but the summary was (doxing of real life names)
01:23, 19 October 2017, Skeptical hid Kirkegaard’s listing of the Wikipedia impersonation account, covered in an SPI case. This could have been Mikemikev, except that Mikemikev would impersonate Kirkegaard is unlikely. This is what Darryl Smith impersonation socking on Wikipedia looks like. A trolling edit, clearly intended to foster attention and probably a block. Mikemikev normally shows a little more caution.
02:25, 19 October 2017 Bongolian blocked Kirkegaard indef. (Doxing: more doxxing from Emil, including links to real peoples names and IP addresses.)
The only editing of EmilOWK after this was on his talk page, this discussion. In it, Skeptical substantiates the “real name” claim with “Ben.” That refers to the creator of the RW article on Kirkegaard. Kirkegaard correctly points out that the RatWiki account was an impersonation. Skeptical makes it clear that anyone who is harassed on RatWiki — as Kirkegaard clearly was, as well as elsewhere in ways that could be linked, they are to be blocked or banned. Yet he and other Rats routinely doxx their targets, claim that such and such an account is a sock of another, and often give real names, having created articles on the person. Skeptical mentions me as a current example — at that time –, and Skeptical was highly involved in that “drama.”
Skeptical was Darryl L. Smith, brother of Oliver D. Smith, and it is Oliver who created the RatWiki article on Kirkegaard, and these users warp and twist evidence and interpretation, which is effectively trolling the targets, using RatWiki.
Skeptical was recently desysopped, though he had not edited since a few days after the events above (he disappeared when accused of being Oliver), for “suspected ban evasion.” He was never banned, it is Oliver who was banned. However, he was intimately involved in long-term disruption, including that begun by Oliver. Impersonation and trollsocking was Darryl’s trademark long-term MO, not Oliver’s.
The “real name” charge was repeated there. In fact, what had been quoted was only the fake name, the impersonation that Oliver later claimed was not an impersonation, because he spelled the name differently. There was also a link to another impersonation of the same user, this time spelling it correctly, but none of this was doxxing the real person, rather, that he would be impersonated, as Kirkegaard was. And, in fact, as that real person was also impersonated on Wikipedia by . . .
Darryl L. Smith. I.e., Skeptical
Which is where I came in, having discovered, shortly before this, that impersonation and then, as I investigated it, I was attacked by an army of trollsocks, in what became a familiar pattern, still happening on Reddit. Those pages did not mention Oliver and Darryl Smith. Later, on the blog, when evidence as to their identity became overwhelming, and they were clearly a public nuisance, I did start to name names. By that time, every detail of my life that they could find that might be presented to look bad or weird was documented in detail on RatWiki and that continued elsewhere as well.
Emil OWK claimed that he had not heard of me, when Skeptical accused him of taking the information from me. Most of that information did not come from me, but I had, by this time, listed connected RatWiki accounts, as suspected socks.
In fact, anyone who looked at the RatWiki accounts for signs of repeat editing by different accounts, could see it. This was all obvious, so why did the Rats react so strongly? Well, Oliver Smith has claimed to be the major contributor of RatWiki articles. Darryl Smith has also been prolific. So they accept this because it’s convenient and useful for their purposes. Smith socking on Wikipedia, particularly by Darryl, has been defacto accepted because it is convenient for that faction to have an attack dog, to do the dirty work, and they can then be blocked when they go too far, tut tut, showing that they are fair. But they don’t undo the damage. And most Wikipedians do not take the time to investigate. Actual evidence is boring. And, besides, someone who compiles it (it’s work!) must be a fanatic, is disruptive, and should be blocked. So if there is evidence, it is probably cherry-picked and misleadin, right?
When the author of an article, that the reader likes, cherry-picks, tut tut, so what? The subject is a crazy loon and reading more, to see if the report is balanced, is too much work. And nobody is responsible.
It’s just the way it is.
Another note on this: the Reddit account that Kirkegaard pointed to was definitely an impersonation, and it spelled the name correctly, but the message was exactly the same as Oliver’s in his writing on RatWiki, in the article. That included posting on the RatWiki subreddit. That person does not want his name mentioned, he was roundly doxxed and defamed over his history, which he left behind as the product of his own mental disorders, and I’ve talked with him extensively, and, yes, definitely some syndrome, including delusional interpretation (sometimes called “hallucinations”) but also a lot of recovery since then. Part of recovery is authenticity, as distinct from denial. People who go through that can end up wiser than normal.
Just to make it clear, the claim here was highly misleading.
I created a global ban list, covering community ban discussions, with results. The office ban list was created later by the WMF. The WMF transcluded that list into the page I created. I never added the name of any office-banned user to that list. Later, I noted that several people who had been banned or subject to a proposed ban were later banned by the WMF. It was pure information, not intended as defamatory. If the office bans were defamatory (I’m claiming that the publication is defamatory), my action did not increase it. I have sued the Foundation over publishing a ban with no foundation, defamatory in context. They have the legal right to ban anyone they choose, as Section 230 of the CDA is interpreted, but that does not give them the right to publish it.
Throwaway accounts are listed; such accounts that are not openly Oliver D. Smith are shown in red.
Real people commenting on Sept. 2 post
(i.e., persons with known identity)
Oliver D. Smith, admitted, many comments listed above as ageofempires858585 [deleted] 36 comments. VortexMel [deleted], later, is clearly Oliver, I doubt there is another person on the planet who would do such a perfect imitation.
Other recent throwaways. (I follow WiA, but I have no means of tracking these in other subreddits, but may be informed about them by others, or then, if I comment, I do see notification of replies. I list them if they are Smith or reasonably suspected as such by the duck test. These are throwaways unless otherwise specified.)
18:45:32 10 Oct 2019 RationalWiki_is_shit Darryl asks his brother, Oliver a question, knowing the answer Oliver will give. Or so it appeared. Later, there is a strong indication that this account is Oliver. It is also possible that the brothers trade accounts to intensify the smokescreen.
20:57:20 10 Oct 2019 NotVortexMel Oliver answers as expected. It is a lie. I specifically identify certain socks as Mikemikev. But Oliver has lied about Mikemikev socks in the past, he created a list of them, and included socks that he later admitted were him. Many of those listed socks, as well, were actually his brother. Nothing these brothers say can be trusted unless carefully verified.
28:22:05 17 November 2019 stopnaziscum [comment removed]
(The Smith brothers, apparently twins, will track a target and find a place where they think someone would be sympathetic to their trolling, they create accounts pretending interest in the topics and then cite the article they created on RationalWiki. This is all massively documented, widely known, and the issue is currently in U.S. Federal court. Google Oliver D. Smith and Darryl L. Smith, or ask here if interested. They have created thousands of sock puppets, that is not hyperbole or exaggeration. My opinion is that most of the socks are Darryl, but Oliver has been much more open about his identity and is better known.
mentioned by a throwaway, other than the above:
oliversmithantifa parody sock, easily could be Mikemikev. Not an impersonation because nobody would think this was Oliver.
(see also the Encyclopedia Dramatica account Mini Abd) (ED is down at this point, might recover, might not. To be clear, contrary to claims, I was not banned there, was only blocked for a time, was unblocked even before it went down the first time last year.)
Darryl L. Smith, joined at times by his twin brother Oliver D. Smith (the latter being quite well-known and banned in many places, both brothers being long-term abusers on WMF Wikis (known as Anglo Pyramidologist), has engaged in a campaign of harassment against me since late 2017, when I exposed his impersonation socking on Wikipedia. It’s a long story, and it is covered briefly in the lawsuit filings, Lomax v. WMF.
On Reddit, he uses throwaway accounts, spamming many subs, highly repetitive — each account normally only is active for a very short time, often one post, but the style and message remains the same. These accounts observed since September 2019 are listed above.
He created the article on RationalWiki and evidences are cited which have been collected from many years of activity, based on shallow appearance. If any regular Redditor is tempted to accept those at face value, ask me, PM on Reddit or comment below. All these issues have been covered at length on the blog, but, indeed at length, so I will give brief summaries if asked.
ageofempires858585 throwaway account, very likely Oliver D. Smith, since nobody else would care. Smith has made this claim about that page before. Notice that he is not specific. He mentions “antifa accounts,” but he confuses account name with a claim of political affiliation.
The page is a list of alleged Mikemikev socks, taken from the Wikia site, RationalWikiWiki, which was apparently booted from Wikia because of Oliver Smith’s attack pages there, and Oliver wrote this list. What I did was to annotate it. I’m careful about that. I colored the listings by category. From the page:
Pink is Oliver Smith, as identified by me. In some cases, these have been openly admitted, or facts admitted which led to a clear conclusion. Others are duck test, often very obvious.
Blue is Darryl L. Smith, as suspected by me. There is no reason to identify these with Mikemikev, and it is unlikely; he may perceive me as an ally (though we have little agreement on politics). (Many more like this remain to be tagged).
Many accounts have not been annotated. Looking over it, I could probably tag more. It is not particularly a high priority. Oliver Smith is now persona no grata on RationalWiki, banned, though he frequently socks. Darry L. Smith is much less obvious. He does have an active account, but very inactive for substantial periods. When he’s done that before, he was fast and furious on Wikipedia. Many of those accounts have never been tagged there (and many were!)
As with any study of sock puppets, there may be incorrect identifications. These are not “lies” unless the one who wrote it knows they are false. Darryl Smith accounts are often simply duck test, but there is technical evidence in some cases. Oliver Smith accounts identified in that list include some where the identification is not in doubt. Arcticos, for example. Oliver included his own accounts in a list of Mikemikev socks! And then claims I’m lying. Typical. M87MrsBlintzNick_Lowles_Fan
(Anti psychic admits being Debunking spiritualism i.e., DS, Darryl L. Smith, who claimed his account had been hacked and that it was me that did it. In fact that account did a massive number of sysop actions, hiding evidence, and then, at the end, created extensive disruption to cover it up. It worked. But it was all Darryl, doing Darryl stuff.)
The “antifa” claim is hilarious. I have no idea that Oliver or Darryl are “antifa,” but Oliver has made appeals to the antifa (to encourage them to attack his enemies). Those are account names, not a political affiliation, and they often are deceptive. In any case, these names were all taken from a list compiled by Oliver Smith of alleged Mikemikev socks. Was he claiming that Mikemikev was “antifa”? (like, the opposite!) I can explain any identification if anyone cares. There is a contributions link for each account.
There was a thread on Wikipediocracy about an unnamed user using another. It did not name either user, deliberately, it was asking for advice about editing and libel. I had not noticed this thread, but I was tipped off that Oliver D. Smith was posting on Wikipediocracy, and there it was. The thread.
And here Oliver pops in, fooling nobody. Knowing a great deal about the facts and history, I suspect that Oliver might actually believe what he says. The deceptions arise in how it is all interpreted. I find that the second page of comments is archived, in case it disappears.
He makes a claim that all this is a result of “misinformation campaigns against me by OpenPsych.” There appears to be no such campaign. Open Psych is essentially Kirkegaard, and his activity is in court in the U.K. It is likely that Oliver is lying about some facts, where he believes “there is no proof.” It’s all characteristic of how he thinks and reacts. If if could have been someone else, then he may think it is okay to claim it wasn’t him. He also claims that it was easy to know who was creating all those articles on RatWiki. Really? For years, anyone who even whispered who it was, was whacked immediately. Further, the Smith brothers created massive confusion about their identities.
Smith is being sued by Emil Kirkegaard. I have not seen the complaint, but Oliver may be telling the truth that this is not about statements on Wikipedia, but there is also what may be impersonation socking on Wikipedia (which can be criminal), and, as well, there have been attacks on Oliver’s favorite targets. Whether they rise to actionable libel or not is a different issue.
Michael D. Suarez is highly knowledgeable about Oliver Smith, having tracked him for years, long before I ever became involved. Dysklyver, as a RatWiki tech, has become knowledgeable and makes cogent comments.
“Randy from Boise” clearly knows what is happening.
“Captain Occam” does as well.
Dysklyver (openly Arthur Kerensa) has recently come to know Oliver well and acted, actually, to protect Oliver on RatWiki from getting himself in even more hot water. In gratitude, Oliver has been heavily attacking him on Reddit with totally irrelevant claims about alleged sock puppetry that nobody would care about.
Oliver does not seem to have noticed that just about nobody is believing him any more. He’s banned from RatWiki because of the extremity of his reactions. In the UNZ comment (linked) he refers, as he often does, to my blog posts, but he never links to them so that people can judge for themselves if they are evidence-free or are a “crazy paranoid allegation” as he claims. Instead he links to what he wrote on RatWiki which was, again, evidence free on this point. There was actual evidence that Oliver had fed stories to media, which were published with inadequate verification (Oliver often presents a piece of evidence which if, primed to see it saying something, can seem to say it. Especially if you don’t read the whole page!)
I’m not bothering to find it at this point. If Kirkegaard needs it, I’ll look for it. There is a resemblance here to my WMF ban. Oliver has recently claimed he had nothing to do with it, but when I was banned, he may have known about it before I did, because he bragged about his response to the complaint email. The same happened when the news appeared about Kirkegaard. He bragged about exposing the racists.
Racism is a serious problem. Deception and lying are worse, actually much worse, because racism can mature to something better, whereas deception and lying poison the well, and may continue to do so for the rest of a person’s life.
Oliver, in the end, to prove a point, that he did not capitalize his comment submitted to the ISIR site (like who cares?), admits that he organized a campaign to harass Kirkegaard, citing what he did, in fact, put on RatWiki.
He is insane, yet he has had an actual impact, and it is now blowing back at him.
I’m listed as a defendant purely based on a vendetta. I actually did nothing wrong and Lomax doesn’t substiantiate any of his allegations about me. I never sent any “defamatory” emails to WMF; I merely sent an email asking an admin to remove where Lomax had doxed my name on either Wikiversity or Meta-Wiki; Lomax was warned multiple times not to dox other user’s real names who were anonymous.
Dysklyver commented in reply: “I think this is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the lawsuit actually entails … Mr. Smith.”
Before I go on with the rest of what Oliver wrote, some clarifications:
Yes, Oliver is listed as a defendant, in an amended complaint that was not properly filed, I was unaware that it was necessary to obtain the permission of the court to add defendants. That amended complaint is the subject of a Motion to Dismiss, and at this point I am holding off on actually filing a proper amendment because it may be necessary to amend the complaint with regard to legal issues in the Motion. Technically, the other defendants have not been sued, and won’t be, really, until and unless they are served with subpoenas, and they won’t be until the court issues them!
The email Oliver mentions, sent to an admin, is not relevant to the lawsuit. The fact there was that I was studying the disruption that had appeared and had linked to a page on Rome Viharo’s blog that had “Oliver Smith” in the URL. It was accidental and even though it was on an obscure page, it was immediately deleted. Actually, the whole page was deleted but then restored with that URL removed.
At that point, Oliver was very little involved, it was all about his brother, but because he and his brother are confused on Wikipedia as Anglo Pyramidologist, which had been his account, there was some idea that mentioning AP was mentioning him. As evidence accumulated, I was able to generally discriminate between the two.
Another point: it is not necessary to “substantiate” allegations in a complaint. That happens later. If no substantiation appears in discovery and trial prep process (and a plaintiff must aver what they will present at trial), then a motion for summary judgment will succeed.
I am not a lawyer and may make many mistakes and may misunderstand parts of the process. But I am also more knowledgeable than what is common and have successfully written pleadings and have worked with lawyers. I have not formally consulted a lawyer with regard to this case, but was advised by a very knowledgeable paralegal, and have seen comments from lawyers that confirm my understandings.
The rest of his lawsuit is based on wild allegations another user was impersonated.
Another user was impersonated, and that was established by steward checkuser. It is implausible that Oliver doesn’t know what his brother did. In email with me, he seemed to think it completely irrelevant, and that it should make no difference what his brother did. But he cooperated and collaborated extensively with his brother, including lying in an attempt to protect him, then he justified the lying as normal, i.e., protecting his brother would excuse lying.
However even if true, none of this is “defamatory”. There was no defamation posted on the alleged impersonation accounts; all that was posted was someone copying what the alleged real user had posted.
The impersonation created a defamatory effect, and by impersonating, it was lying about identity. This was actually identity theft, with malicious intent. I personally find it appalling that the WMF went after the one who exposed this, instead of taking serious action against impersonation. I was reluctant to claim malice on the part of the WMF, but it became legally necessary, and, legally, “malice” has a somewhat different meaning than ordinary language. I continue to hope that the WMF will actually investigate what happened, instead of assuming that what they did must be right, because they supposedly have a fail-safe process. It’s obvious that they don’t.
So it would be equivalent to someone using my username “Jelly” (or something similar) and copying this message.
So, we know that Jelly is Oliver Smith. What would be equivalent would be someone creating a sock called JellyToo, and quoting him, and adding that he has a stash of child porn that nobody can do anything about. That would be defamation. Yes! It would be similar, though more serious! Oliver is ignorant of the law and of possibilities.
The lawsuit will almost certainly be dismissed.
It’s quite a good possibility, though not at this stage. I’ve read a lot of case law, and dismissal does happen when the plaintiff fails to properly plead what is necessary, but with proper pleading and even “reasonable suspicion,” the case must go forward. And then we often see that the plaintiff requests that the case be dismissed.
Why? Well, it’s not stated, but it is quite likely that, once the defendant understood that this was going into discovery, which may be other than fun, they got serious about negotiation, and an agreement was reached, which will often require non-disclosure.
And if the case is dismissed against the WMF, this would not dismiss a case against the other defendants. Oliver has no clue.
Nice, friendly, more knowledgeable — by far — than most, but the situation is complex.
Two commenters were probably defendants.
“Robert” could be Darryl L. Smith, the one whose impersonation socking caused the entire mess with the WikiMedia Foundation. His comment is highly deceptive, as usual, it is certainly the Smith party line. The current Amended Complaint explains some of this, but Darryl’s real issue with me is that I exposed what he had done, which is called “picking fights.” I typically create one account when I participate, and if I am banned (which does happen sometimes), I consider that site owners have the right, and don’t keep creating accounts. Exceptions have been quite rare and for very limited purpose. Darryl and his brother Oliver have created thousands of accounts, pursuing their attack plans.
It’s a lolsuit. At least one of the defendants he lists doesn’t even exist and another is wrongly listed. I’m also listed for no reason.
There is clear evidence for “existence” of every defendant. Yet there have been so many lies and deceptions around the activities of the Smith brothers that it’s difficult to be sure about anything.
How would Smith know what he claims? This is the apparent fact: he and his brother know who complained, and there is a defendant named where evidence of participation in the conspiracy is thin, so he might be referring to that as “wrongful.” But one may name a defendant in a lawsuit, or even in a “lolsuit,” based on suspicion if there is any evidence at all, and there is.
As to not existing at all, there is a defendant called “Max,” who wrote about being a complainant to the WMF, over a year ago. Recently an anonymous user on the CFC wiki claimed to be this person and confessed his role (and then commented more as Max). Max was then threatened with harm. Does “Max” exist? Or is this yet another impersonation in the smoke screens laid down by the Smiths? Again, I don’t care. Max is on the list unless he decides to help clean up the mess he helped make. And if he doesn’t exist, I will have some difficulty serving him, right?
As to Oliver being listed for “no reason,” he is either brain-dead or lying. He was one of the complainants leading to the WMF ban. He bragged about it.
And then, on Gender Desk:
Oliver D. Smith JULY 17, 2019 AT 12:39 AM
lol. The deletion of what you call the “parapsychology resource” had nothing with attacking academic freedom but the fact they’re pseudoscience. The person who wrote that junk who doesn’t want to be named isn’t even an academic (as you know). And Wikiversity deleted it for being pseudoscience.
They had no idea what they were doing. Wikiversity hosts “educational resources,” which can study anything, excepting only certain illegal material. “Pseudoscience” was never before a deletion reason on Wikiversity, and there is, of course, a Wikipedia article on parapsychology. Parapsychology is explicitly a science, quite the same science as was involved with the founding of CSICOP, “The Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal.”
Many “scientists” — in what fields? — imagine that parapsychology involves a “belief” in some interpretation of claims.
The Wikiversity resource was rigorously neutral, it had been challenged and was confirmed by an administrator there. But there was an occasional attack on it, by those who it or part of it deleted. That was an attack on academic freedom, a fascist prohibition of the study of “forbidden topics.”
Compared to “normal disruption” on Wikipedia, this was practically trivial.
“The person” referred to was the collector of one subpage, an annotated list of sources, not the whole resource. And he may have realized that study of parapsychology (and “psychic phenomena”) is not necessary good for him. This is completely irrelevant, and that work still exists (I rescued the deleted material) and he has not asked for it to be deleted.
Wikiversity is not only for academics. It’s a public wiki, where people may study any topic they choose. That is, it was that until the Smiths attacked, having recruited some Wikipedians to kill the one place in the WMF family where there was genuine academic freedom (though Wikibooks could be close, and, in fact, Wikiversity was an offshoot of Wikibooks)..
Oliver D. Smith JULY 17, 2019 AT 12:32 AM
The defendants (all of them) he lists have said Lomax is lying and that’s not at all what happened. Obviously though he disagrees and has his own view of events. All I can say is take what Lomax says with a pinch of salt.
Again, how does Oliver know this? It’s obvious and there is plenty of evidence (quite enough to take this into discovery and trial), these people communicated and coordinated off-wiki.
“Lomax is lying” is not a statement with any specificity. Oliver has been saying this for more than a year, almost never pointing to any actual statements. It’s just a big blob of mud thrown. I have made a series of statements in the Amended Complaint (and it should get even clearer in the Second Amended Complaint, which is planned), and each of those is factually based, plus there are interpretations based on “reasonable suspicion.” To survive a motion to dismiss, the suspicion must be plausible. I affirm, in filing such a complaint, that everything in it is true “on information and belief.” What are Oliver’s statements?
He has lied over and over, and this has been covered many times and there may even be a reference to one of them here. For quite some time he claimed that all the disruption on Wikipedia, Wikiversity, and Meta was not him, it was his brother. He confirmed other aspects of the story as it was developing. And then he wrote that it had all been a lie, it was all him. And then he wrote something like maybe it was and maybe it wasn’t.
So sometimes he claims that his brother doesn’t exist, or if he does exist, he has nothing to do with the wikis. It is radically implausible, given the very obvious personality differences, but we will find out. What I care about most is that the truth emerges. And I trust the truth more than I trust myself.
(He was realizing that the heat was being turned up on his brother, who was far less well-known, and it is possible that his brother was being paid, that was one of the stories based on statements made by socks apparently Darryl. Since Oliver is on the dole in the U.K, living with parents, he would be taking the heat on himself as “judgment proof.” So that’s a motive to lie. Reality will come out, it has a way of doing that. There is a brother, it’s called “public records.” And this is no longer a wiki game, where “outing” is BAD. It is real life, where it can be necessary to name names.
Meanwhile, Oliver is being sued for defamation in the United Kingdom, and the case appears to be pretty much open and shut. He called someone who is not a pedophile a “pedophile.” He toned it down in some presentations to “pedophile defender” or “child rape apologist,” when his target was neither. And because I pointed this out, I was also called a “pedophile defender” or the like.
“No reason”? Besides being blocked as many accounts on Wikipedia, Oliver is now also formally banned (as many accounts) on RationalWiki, has many, many blocked accounts on Encyclopedia Dramatica, and many thowaway accounts on Reddit that appear to be him, from arguments, they either simply disappear or show up as [deleted], which could mean “blocked.” (I am no longer blocked on ED, that was transient). I’m not socking anywhere, though there are impersonations, one of their favorite tactics.
To my knowledge, the only defendant who has openly denied the charges in the lawsuit is Oliver. None of the others have commented publicly. So unless he is completely lying (not impossible!), he is in private communication with them. [Since this was written, JzG has made statements.]
And finally, a comment from Gender Desk herself (assuming a pronoun, if I may):
As far as I can tell, this is about Rational Wiki and the Skeptics, and started out as a content dispute over whether pseudoscience and “original research” should be included in certain areas of Wikimedia projects.
What this was originally about and what it became are not the same.
Originally, this was not about RationalWiki at all. Nor was it really about “the skeptics,” though Darryl Smith presents himself as a skeptic. It was about a very personal attack on a student of parapsychology, who had been invited by me to work on the topic on Wikiversity, because I knew he was interested (This was partly to distract him from socking on Wikipedia, where he had been blocked long before for old behaviors.) It worked, he almost entirely refrained from editing Wikipedia, but there were a few exceptions, actually harmless. What happens when you compile sources and annotate them is that you learn. This is why students do this in real universities. That page was attributed as his work. And that is how Wikiversity allows original research. It is not presented as neutral. It’s “study.”
The Parapsychology project on Wikiversity was, over the years, occasionally attacked by single-purpose accounts, later recognizable as Darryl. (Darryl was also known as Goblin Face on Wikipedia). This time, as an SPA, Darryl filed a sock puppet investigation, but nobody was paying attention (there was really very little disruption, if any, and Darryl relied on Facebook postings, etc.)
So, as he later explained as a sock, I think it was on Meta, he had to do something. So he created sock puppets to impersonate this user, daring Wikipedians to do something to stop him, he could do whatever he wanted on Wikiversity, LOL!
So they did something, and the particular page he had been working on was deleted and he was blocked for “cross-wiki disruption.” I had not been paying attention to Wikiversity, having basically abandoned it as unsafe (even though it was much safer than Wikipedia). When I found out, I filed steward checkuser requests and the impersonation socking was confirmed. And I started looking at how obvious single-purpose accounts could create such disruption, while administrators were clueless dupes.
Starting up that study, I was intensely attacked, and many socks were globally locked. And then the RatWiki article appeared. And then the coordinated attack on the Wikiversity resource on cold fusion appeared, started by an IP. This was then repeated for the entire Parapsychology resource. The arguments can be seen in the archive.
There had been no disruption at all over cold fusion on Wikiversity, since the resource was started in 2006, until this Request for Deletion arrived in 2017, full of irrelevant arguments, a complete mess. (The resource history can be seen here. No revert warring, no conflict. Actual educational discussion.)
There had been minor disruption over Parapsychology, all easily handled. Until this.
The attack was actually personal, on me and my work (I created the Parapsychology resource in response to requests from scientists, and to show how a resource on a controversial topic could be neutral, and still academically free. If interested, I suggest reading the discussions.)
“Original research” was always explicitly allowed on Wikiversity, as long as it was disclosed as such. There is a huge difference between activity in a university and activity in creating an encyclopedia. The force for deletion was entirely from non-Wikiversitans.
Michael Umbricht, who acknowledged receiving complaints by email, invented an entirely new reason for deletion, never seen before or since. From his behavior, he intervened precisely to support the revenge effort from Darryl, who had recruited Guy Chapman (JzG) and Joshua P. Schroeder (ජපස), who were long-term Wikipedia enemies of everything fringe or “pseudoscientific.”
Umbricht then extended deletion to a large number of pages in my user space, deleting them without warning — totally violating deletion policy. These pages had been used for many purposes and some were historically important. But they were easily identifiable as “Abd’s work,” which he had likely promised to delete. Deletions without notice, for legal content, was unheard of on Wikiversity.
To recover these pages required downloading very large Wikiversity XML dumps and writing a program to extract pages with a prefix from it. (I’ve been unable to find such a utility that I could use).
The actual motivation here was not really a content dispute. It was about revenge. The RatWiki article was about revenge, and there are many examples where the Smiths did that, going back long before I was involved.
They learned how to manipulate administrators, and the WMF fell for it.
Gender Desk has posted another page about the lawsuit:
Thanks, Gender Desk, it all works together. One point that can be missed. I did have a “Count 4” in the Amended Complaint, asking to be unbanned. But I am abandoning that, for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that this would be of very little value to me personally, and by the TOU, very limited recovery ($1000 max) for damages. It is not worth the effort for a single person. It could be a class action, but I’m not holding my breath. It would be difficult, because of how the CDA Section 230 has been interpreted, but not impossible. Not my call. I’m going for what is easy. After all, Not a Lawyer.
The rest of the suit is about defamation and conspiracy to harass and defame, not their right to ban.
This is a message received as a contact form submission by one of my daughters, who has a web site. This is an example of the kind of harassment anyone who impedes the Smith agenda can expect. If anyone has questions about the claims in this mail, comments here are enabled. Suffice it to say, the implications of this mail are deliberate and malicious lies.
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: [site host redacted]
Date: Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:52 AM
Subject: Form Submission – Contact – Abd ul-Rahman Lomax your father
To: [address redacted]
Name: Paul Davies
Email Address: email@example.com
Subject: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax your father
Tell me about you!: Hi,
I am sorry to have to contact you. Is your father Abd ul-Rahman Lomax aka Dennis George Lomax?
Your father is involved in some very dark and disturbing things on the internet. For the last ten years he has been living a double life on the internet viciously attacking people and doxing people on his website. He has been banned on 7 websites for harassing others users. Recently he has been publishing disturbing articles that defend pedophilia. I am not sure if your father Abd Lomax is a pedophile but he has written articles defending pedophiles. 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.
There is a long article that factually documents your father’s internet abuse:
Your father uses the online username “Abd”. He has been globally banned on Wikipedia, Wikiversity and from the Wikimedia Foundation for harassing and attacking users.
Your father appears to be online almost everyday, all day doing this, it is not healthy. I am reaching out to you in good faith. 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 father because of the defamation he has been posting on specific people for years.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_globally_banned_users (your father 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. Your father was sending other users threats and posting in where they live on these Wikis. You father gets banned on nearly every forum or website he joins. He is involved in some very dark online activities and is known to create hundreds of accounts and impersonations of people to harass them. 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.
I mean your father no harm, I suspect your father 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 father’s real life history but if his internet activities continue he may end up in a lot of trouble.
I recommend that your warn your family about this. As of this month March, 2018, your father has been spamming Rationalwiki users abuse. I would appreciate it if you would tell him to get off the internet, stop attacking our website and stop attacking people online. 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.
If you have a project you’d like to discuss, please describe your vision:: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Abd_ul-Rahman_Lomax
I abandoned Wikipedia in 2011, having concluded that the quest for WP neutrality was hopeless, and focused all my wiki attention on Wikiversity, where neutrality was routinely attainable. I was an administrator on Wikiversity during several periods and was very active developing resources and protecting the site. This, however, attracts opposition, and by 2016, I had decided that Wikiversity, though routinely peaceful, was also unsafe, not a place to develop studies and content, so almost all activity ceased. However, in September, 2017, I received an email from a user I had helped develop a study on Wikiversity, that his study had been deleted and he was blocked.
When I looked, it appeared that he had done some disruptive sock puppetry on Wikipedia, and that, as a response, the deletion of his resource and a block of him was requested, and that, in spite of that being quite irregular and contrary to traditions, was granted.
I reprimanded him for being disruptive on Wikipedia, but he said that of the disruptive accounts claimed, most were not his. So I looked and it was plausible. The complainant on Wikipedia was a single-purpose-account (SPA) with no other history, and likewise the original complainant on Wikiversity. So I went to the coordinating wiki for all WikiMedia Foundation projects (Meta) and requested that stewards look at the private information that is available for all WMF wiki activity.
The user had been impersonated. I was interested in how an SPA could create so much disruption and nobody looked at the SPA, but only at the target! So I started to document this, and immediately massive attack began. Because this was causing local problems, Wikiversity not having many active administrators, I moved the study to Meta. Attack continued, but then I was threatened that all my work would be deleted if I did not stop.
(From later research, I concluded that the impersonator and the one threatening me was Darryl L. Smith).
All was quiet for some time, then an article written about me appeared on RationalWiki. Then a request to delete the largest piece of work I had done on Wikiversity was filed. Then a bureaucrat who had been inactive blocked me, claiming I had been massively disruptive.
WMF Global ban
And then, before this could be appealed, the WikiMedia Foundation globally banned me. This was immediately noted on RationalWiki, and a user, later identified as Oliver D. Smith, published the email he had received from the WMF, informing him they had acted on his report.
The WMF did not respond to my emails. “Office Bans” are officially not appealable. I sent a certified mail to the Registered Agent for the WMF. There was no response.
Having no other recourse, eventually I filed an action for defamation in U.S. Federal Court against the WMF and nine “John Does,” hoping that the WMF might actually investigate, based on information that they likely did not have when they made their decision.
I hoped that the action might easily be settled. However, at this point, the WMF has filed a Motion to Dismiss, based on arguments I expected. I will be amending my Complaint to reflect a clearer exposition of what happened, with regard to the factual basis for a libel claim. To ensure that this case is argued clearly from the strongest positions, I am seeking support, so that I may obtain legal counsel as well as public advice and funding for expenses.
I will do what I can do without that support, but the WMF has retained Jones Day, the largest legal firm in the United States, to represent them. (The WMF has very ample resources!) I’m living on Social Security. I do receive, through a nonprofit, necessary expenses for the journalism and related research I do. But that nonprofit is not for this purpose. I paid the $400 filing fee out of pocket, being willing to spend that in order to take a stand.
(The ultimate issue with Wikiversity was academic freedom, and the Smith brothers have long attacked this in many ways and with many people.)
I will amend my Complaint to add names of those reasonably suspected of having defamed me in the private complaints, and I hope to consult counsel before amending. I have until June 10 unless the judge grants additional time.
Darryl L. Smith, probably the original impersonator and the creator of the RationalWiki article.
Oliver D. Smith, his brother, who collaborated with the retaliation and was a complainant.
Joshua P. Schroeder, who falsely claimed I had harassed him by email and who wrote he would complain.
Guy Chapman, a Wikipedia administrator who likely collaborated in this, who had a long-term grudge because I had created an Arbitration Committee case in which he had been reprimanded.
Michael Umbricht, the Wikiversity administrator who blocked and probably complained.
(Names may be dropped or added based on Discovery, if the case proceeds.)
The case as a whole may continue against additional defendants, even if the WMF is dropped as a defendant. However, the legal principle here, as to the WMF, is whether or not they can be held responsible for harm done to another as a result of their negligence and publication of a ban, which is rare, only 30 in the history of the WMF, and such bans are explicitly for serious hazard to users. That they might block access to an account without notice is their right — and possibly a necessity, but publication is a separate and unnecessary step. So when the Smiths claimed I had harassed users, they could point to the ban as proof, making the claim far stronger thus the published ban served to support defamation.
I’ll just ask you kindly to stop spreading lies and baseless rumours about me on Wikipediocracy. You’re as bad as the trolls like Abd. View my user-page for disclaimer. I don’t have a brother who has ever edited RationalWiki or Reddit. The “Smith brother conspiracy theory” was Abd’s invention along with some other trolls from Encyclopedia Dramatica. @D Put your pet Discord troll on a leash. Tobias (talk) 13:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
@Tobias what is the issue exactly? EK (talk) 14:11, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Tired of people repeating the same lies. I don’t have a brother involved in any of this. Mikemikev doxed a family member of mine “Darryl” years back; he’s in full time employment working 6 days a week. He has no social media, doesn’t post on wikis like here and doesn’t have the spare time to troll Reddit etc. Yet that Wikipediocracy thread is filled with misinformation about him including you claiming he posts on Reddit and is behind the recent avalanche of socks there. All those socks are Mikemikev/Abd. Mikemikev is unemployed and Abd is retired. They have all the time in the world to create socks on Reddit.Tobias (talk) 14:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Oliver has also been claiming it was me or Mikemikev. (without evidence, by the way). I have speculated that it was not Oliver, but his brother, who has more of a history of that kind of disruption (though this was extreme).
Oliver has many times implicated his brother. Then obvious Oliver accounts that did this were later claimed to be impersonations. Never, by the way, immediately. From Oliver’s User page:
“”People can view my edits, I’ve not “attacked” or “harassed” anyone rather I’ve documented and criticised their pseudoscientific beliefs; I also have written a rebuttal to Noah Carl’s FAQ that contains many falsehoods and misleading statements. None of this is “harassment”.
I presume Michael knows 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.
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
There is no brother. I’ve just had fun misleading people, like yourself stalking me as have other RW sysops who have tried to protect their identities. It’s a problem though that you would target and dox an innocent family member of mine, based on this.
Lomax however is obsessed with this brother, writing dozens of articles on him when he has no involvement on either RationalWiki or Wikipedia. He’s never posted on these at all, and doesn’t even know anything about this, and he has no internet or social media presence. I just mislead people who are trying to stalk or dig up information me, as with lots of other stuff. I found all this amusing at first, but it’s now a problem that Lomax is writing all these articles on someone who isn’t involved at all that is abusing search-engine results of a real person who is innocent. […]
A method to get unblocked on Wikipedia is to claim you have a brother or sister editing. I used that excuse several times to get unblocked many years back. I don’t even have a real sister, but made an account pretending to be female, and so on. I don’t have any links to ‘skeptics’ and I posted the same false information to Farley. At one point he was trying to see what was going on, and I just gave him the brother story I invented. I fed people nonsense about shadow skeptic organisations and paid editing, there’s none of it. It’s all one guy (me) and I have no connections. I’m now nearly 28, and I think it’s time to throw in the towel editing wikis completely (leaving RationalWiki etc), furthermore I have a lot of things to be getting on with and this has been time-consuming and wasting my time.
As for myself lying about Dan Skeptic, I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether I’m really him, or protecting a brother as Lomax thinks. Should I be criticized for the latter?
Oliver lives in a world of blame and defense against blame. Reality and truth and simple honesty are not on his radar. If he lies to protect his brother, he’s responsible for consequences. If he lies about a brother, and that causes problems for the brother, he’s responsible for consequences. What is remarkable here is that he asserts that he created the brother story, but then he blames everyone else for making it up. This is the reality: if there is a brother who is being harmed by what I write, that brother is free to write me to correct the record. “There is no brother” is not consistent with that, by the way.
No, my conclusion is that Oliver became desperate. He had spilled too many beans, and his brother started putting pressure on him. So to protect the brother, the “it was all a lie” was invented. However, two people are different from one, and the record shows two clear personalities, different even if twin brothers. Because of how they have coordinated, they are both responsible for the entire collection of actions, at least to a degree. “Responsibility” is not “blame.” it is a far more grounded concept, it assumes that humans have power and create consequences, and may be socially required to clean up messes they create.
Because Oliver ended up thoroughly and extensively outed, the VDARE article went much further than Mikemikev (and I had done much less, basically, I was just interested in geolocation for identification purposes), Oliver decided to focus on the “no brother involved” story. Hence what Emblyn wrote on Wikipediocracy was utterly intolerable to Oliver. So, he did go to Discord, and this is what he wrote:
Cheers, love! Tobias is here! 05/16/2019 at 15:13 [system message]
Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 15:17 about time @Tobias hi
Oliver D. Smith 05/16/2019 at 15:27 Just post my response I left you on RationalWiki on the Wikipediocracy thread. I don’t have anything else really to say. If you’re unfamiliar with Viharo: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rome_Viharo Rome Viharo
Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 15:28 ye what u never explained is why i should trust u over them
Oliver D. Smith 05/16/2019 at 15:31 Because I actually provide evidence for my claims. In contrast the allegation I have a brother on RationalWiki or Reddit – is not only false but Abd/Rome Viharo/Mikemikev present zero evidence. Might as well claim the Reddit socking is my imaginary sister.
Emblyn0 5/16/2019 at 15:32 u wrote the evidence also
what say u to that
Oliver D. Smith 05/16/2019 at 15:34 Just made up nonsense. You’re obviously another troll.
Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 15:35 it is the opening paragraph of an article i wrote about u but never published many things are unclear surrounding ur history
Oliver D. Smith 05/16/2019 at 15:41 Is there any evidence you are even who you claim, and not a sock of someone? You could be Abd Lomax or Mikemikev for all I know. I mean do you have social media, a verifiable email etc. Dysk is an utter simpleton who has claimed to use discord to “prove who people are”, yet all I’m seeing here is possible fake accounts with stupid avatars. There is no way to confirm anyone’s real identity here, furthermore I know Mikemikev has been here and was made a sysop on RationalWiki after he pretended here to be someone else. Anyway, I’m leaving.
Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 15:42 i am a full admin here and have my discord id on my userpage so ye
Dysk 05/16/2019 at 15:46 Smith was here. : } Epic.
Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 15:53 ye
Oliver is literally insane, I’ll say it again. If he wanted to head off the problem, he did exactly the opposite of what it would take. And then, on RatWiki, he added to User talk:EK:
I left a message there, but I don’t trust Discord, anyone can go there and pretend to be someone else. I also suspect you aren’t who you claim and I raised concerns about your account before. You’re likely someone’s sockpuppet pretending to be someone else. Regardless, I don’t have any further interest in [Troll Image].Tobias (talk) 16:18, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
I’ll only trust who you are if you have a verifiable profile and email etc. Dysklyver has these things, so we know who he is, but he bizarrely uses photos of someone wearing a balaclava. That certainly isn’t normal. I can easily be found with verified profiles on ResearchGate (that requires a university email), Twitter etc. Tobias (talk) 16:36, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
17:20, Oliver edited User talk:EK with an edit which has been suppressed.
Then, back on Discord:
Tobias has joined the server! It’s super effective! Today at 1:26 PM
Tobias 5/16/2019 at 17:29 I think Emblyn and Dysk are the same person. Lots of evidence to support this. This is very disturbing and one of the most mentally ill individuals I’ve ever come across. I won’t bother presenting this evidence here.
Oliver then more material at 17:41 to that talk page, also suppressed and he was banned for harassment and doxxing. The users who had given him a chance, in the end, whacked him. User rights log. Block log.
Oliver has been blocked many times, it’s almost meaningless to him. However, this is the first major block where his identity has been clearly known.
He can tell his brother he tried.
The followup on Discord shows that people have figured out what the Smiths do. This is Oliver, who is Obvious Obvious. Darryl is generally not so obvious.
TDA WP 05/16/2019 at 17:45 PM He’ll probably pop back in here later to deny that account was really him and blame Abd/Mikemikev/Viharo/the postman for it.
Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 17:47 PM too late they admitted it was them on rationalwiki
TDA WP 05/16/2019 at 17:50 PM Maybe he’ll claim he was hacked. He’s done that too.
Whoever TDA WP is, they have been paying attention. Atlantid claimed that his last comments on Metapedia, in 2012, were hacked by Mikemikev. Then his brother Debunking spiritualism on RatWiki claimed I had hacked his account last year. In fact, DS had made a pile of Smith agenda deletions and blocks, and then added trolling disruption to cover it up. It worked, in part, and that’s all the Smiths need. They spend accounts to get their mission accomplished, accounts are cheap to them. Or have been so.
Dysk 05/16/2019 at 17:50 PM I suppressed the last few edits. But yeah I would like to ban-hammer him.
Oxyaena 05/16/2019 at 17:53 PM no need https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Log/block
Oxyaena 05/16/2019 at 17:56 PM I expect to be harassed by Oliver very soon if he shows up in ratwiki cord you know what to do @Dysk ban him from here as well
Dysk 05/16/2019 at 17:57 PM Idk, it’s a mixed blessing.
Dysk is one of the least ban-happy sysops I’ve seen. He is correct, sometimes allowing a user to comment, even with angry nonsense, can create value. It can be a difficult judgment. Better with a single account than with many.
Oxyaena 05/16/2019 at 17:58 PM dude needs help serious help
Dysk 05/16/2019 at 17:58 PM Yeah that’s for sure.
Now, what is going to happen when Oliver emails David Gerard? We may never know. Or maybe we will. . . .
This began my involvement with Darryl L. Smith and Oliver D. Smith. Oliver was only peripherally involved. However, his brother involved him. Oliver was ZaFrumi (later acknowledged in email). These were the contributions of ZaFrumi, first on Wikiversity:
@ Abd, you agreed with Dan Skeptic/Goblin Face in 2014 about Rome Viharo. On RationalWiki you wrote Viharo is a troll, that he was never doxed at Wikipedia (he posted his real name as a signature), that he was a paid editor, that he posts “deceptive claims”/”inaccuracies” and so on. These are all things Dan Skeptic/Goblin Face and Manul have been saying since day 1. Michaeldsuarez however takes the complete opposite view and runs around the internet defending Viharo. It will be funny to see what you make of this, are you saying you’ve changed your mind on Viharo? Otherwise its unclear why you would side with Michael to now attack Dan Skeptic.ZaFrumi (discuss • contribs) 15:36, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
And old news. Those Wiki archives are several different people. Lots of people have shared those Ips. It was only Michael who spread the misinformation all those accounts on the Goblin Face archive is a single person. He then wrote a defamatory encylopedia dramatica article accusing this person of mental illness because there are so many conflicting views/post styles etc on the accounts. Any rational person though can see its different editors sharing an IP.ZaFrumi (discuss • contribs) 15:41, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
I acknowledged that you had a twin brother months ago. Anyway, it doesn’t change the facts: the two of you are engaged in massive sockpuppetry and deception. So what if there’s two of you? You both still create a large amount of accounts, lie, and attack others. Also, regardless of how many of you are, your behavior still points to obsession. —Michaeldsuarez (discuss • contribs) 16:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
I defended Viharo because I realized how obsessed you are with Viharo and your other targets. Abd didn’t have all the facts about Viharo’s situation in 2014. I’ll inform Abd via Email. —Michaeldsuarez(discuss • contribs) 16:45, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Yawn. ZaFrumi is denying the accounts associated with the Steigmann drama. You have 0 evidence linking him to any of those accounts. It is libel to accuse someone of impersonation when you have no technical evidence. Abd was banned on Wikipedia, he is not an admin. You cannot prove ZaFrumi, his family members, Manul or any other editor anyone else did those things in regard to Steigmann. You talk about obsession but you have never worked in a job in real life, you are a man pushing 30 and you still live with your parents, you have made nothing of your life apart from attacking people on an immoral website Encyclopedia Dramatica . Your life seems to be ZaFrumi. Again you have turned up on a website to discuss him, not the other way round. Your entire life seems to be stalking other people. You refuse to move on. Why is your life ZaFrumi? You once claimed you were moving on with your life a few months ago but you are back to your old tricks again stalking people and getting involved in things which do not concern you. I ask again none of this has anything to do with you, so why are you yet again poking your nose in? Random person 99(discuss • contribs) 16:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
~ The sock master to those alleged impersonations is “Sci-fi”. I’m not this person. Also, there’s nothing linking that sock master to Goblin Face either; no technical evidence, nothing. My IP is/was also shared by more than 2 people involved with the Rome Viharo “drama”; another person has since come forward after Viharo has now stalked/attacked my entire family on his website. ZaFrumi (discuss • contribs) 17:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Since your other talk is being spammed, I’ll leave you a final comment. I’ve been virtually offline for the past 4-5 months (since Kiwi Farms took down their stuff about me; they even deleted Rome Viharo’s article); so you’re not reading about me, but others… I cannot prevent other people editing from my IP. Most the time I don’t even know what they are doing; I have no involvement whatsoever with “Laird” and had not even heard of him until a few days ago. I only show up when someone doxes me; the fact is I have no interest in “Ben Steigman”, “Laird” etc and my only account on these wikis was “Englisc”; this should be clear by the name/post-styles.ZaFrumi (talk) 17:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
So, comments. First, thanks for The Pump, Darryl. Great video. I’ll go to the gym later today with an improved attitude. Every little bit helps.
Second, Oliver (ZaFrumi) sees everything in terms of “taking sides.” He has no respect for truth. He exaggerates or cherry-picks what others report, makes it into a straw man argument, then ridicules it. “All those accounts.” I since reviewed all that Rome Viharo (Tumbleman) activity. Viharo did accidentally reveal his name. However, he promptly blanked it. He was a naive user, he did not know to request revdel. But he was honest. He also did not distinguish between AP socks, and the most visible real person was Oliver. This happened in many places, Oliver was accused of what was actually his brother.
Oliver is raising a smokescreen here. He knows the truth, but is presenting irrelevant arguments, but with someone (MDS) who knows too much to fool like this. What Oliver did not know was that I had known MDS for a long time. I did not always agree with him, but I also knew he was honest, a quality that Oliver was lacking and obviously did not care about — and still doesn’t. He will not recover from his disorders until he commits to rigorous and careful honest. That is what I know from years of experience.
The Smiths have confused many, and then when, in the confusion they created, someone is incorrect, they attack that person as a liar.
Random person 99 then shows up. Checkuser identified this as the same person as Sci-fi, and the rest of the socks. I’ll just call him Darryl. Darryl points out that Oliver (ZaFrumi) is not the disruptive accounts. That is very likely true. He is them. Notice that he does not actually deny it, rather “you cannot prove.” This is the common error of deniers, they believe in impossibility arguments. How could they know what can be “proven” or not? What does “prove” mean? In real life, we have evidence, and we may analyze the evidence to come up with conclusions, which are, in order of strength, suspicions, inferences, conclusions, conclusions by the preponderance of the evidence, conclusions beyond a reasonable doubt.
My IP is/was also shared by more than 2 people involved with the Rome Viharo “drama”… “More than two”? Who is the third person? The obvious candidate is the third brother, older. Oliver was essentially admitting “family.” Or he was lying, which he later claimed as well.
Ben Steigman. Notice how he spelled it (the real name has two n’s at the end). He spelled it “Steigmans” when he created the article on Emil Kirkegaard. He’s lying. He expresses extremes to exclude the middle. “No interest” could mean “not much interest.”
In those first edits, MDS had posted a notice of email sent, as IP. Englisc responded with personal information. MDS replied using his account, restoring the information, Dave did not understand what was happening and blocked MDS for a day. Notice that later Englisc uses this to attack MDS. This is what the Smiths have done again and again, confused administrators, who take action out of the confusion, and then the Smiths cite the action as proof that their target is disruptive.
Request custodian action.Englisc again lies. He was correct that he was not behind all the other socks. It was his brother. Instead, he cries Lies! On his user page, he writes: “~ This is my only account on this Wiki.” All WMF users have ready-to-use SUL accounts on all the wikis. However, it may be automatically registered when the user looks at the Wiki while logged in, for Englisc this was 19:36, 25 September 2017. Za Frumi was registered 15:25, 27 September 2017. Englisc was blocked 20:16, 26 September 2017. So Za Frumi (Oliver) was block and lock evading (and also on meta).
That “nonsense” listed 18 suspected socks. (Oliver and Darryl always call these “accusations.” In fact, checkuser requests should be “suspected.” The old tradition was that checkuser was only requested if there was disruption, and there is no offense in listing an account reasonably suspected. Suspicion is grounds for investigation, not prosecution, which requires evidence. All 18 socks and more were globally locked as the same user. That was probably partially incorrect, because there were two users, specifically Oliver and Darryl. (This kind of “error” is common. Admins will consider people living in the same house as if meat puppets, treated the same as socks. If both persons are disruptive, they don’t care.)
Oliver would have known, though, that the IP was the same, and he could have disclosed what he knew. But he did not. Instead he attacked me. Notice that he lies about MDS. (With the kind of lie Oliver is famous for: misleading truth. It was for doxing. What he does not say is that he had put up the doxxing.
I never accused Oliver of being the sci-fi socks. Rather, in the full checkuser report, it can be seen how, after looking at Mikemikev (based on a red herring) I came to suspect “Anglo Pyramidologist,” the sock family, not Oliver personally. (Because Oliver was that specific account, he confuses this.) In a later report, I added ”
ZaFrumi (talk • contribs • block • xwiki-contribs • xwiki-date • CA • ST • lwcheckuser) suspected related SPA, not clearly abusive.
This was certainly not an accusation. It is not clear that the stewards looked at this account. But this was lock evasion, we now know, because Englisc had been locked. (I did not at the time put that together.)
This was a series of spectacular successes at filing checkuser requests. In short order, I was accused of running a vendetta, by a Wikiversity bureaucrat who had been recruited by private complaints — he stated that.
So, fast forward. As a result of private complaints, not only was I blocked on Wikiversity (totally out-of-process, contrary to policy), but I was globally banned, and then this promptly appeared from Oliver, as ODS, on RationalWiki:
Lomax is a habitual liar. “No harassment by Lomax” shows the insanity and delusions of this guy; he was just globally blocked by Wikimedia Foundation for harassment and I received this confirmation email today:
Thank you for your patience while we reviewed this. I just wanted to close the loop on this matter as we concluded our investigation. We’ve taken what you’ve sent into consideration as we reviewed Abd’s conduct in a larger context in regards to whether the Foundation should take any action. We determined that the conduct did merit Foundation-led action and yesterday, 24 February 2018, we proceeded in enforcing a Wikimedia Foundation Global Ban against Abd. This means that this user is no longer welcome on the Wikimedia projects, under any username he has used or may use in the future. While we obviously can’t guarantee our global ban will stop the issues the community has been facing I’m hopeful that it will help. We will continue to watch and listen for future issues, moving forward, but please let us know if you have any questions or believe there is something else we can do to help. Warm regards.
As I noted above, a Wikimedia Foundation Global is very rare and only applies to severe cases of harassment. I have no further interest in responding to Lomax – he sent me harassing emails. Why is it Joshua P. Schroeder also has said Lomax sent him harassing emails, if I’m making this up? Why is Lomax banned from Wikipedia, Wikiversity, Meta-Wiki, RationalWiki and now a Wikimedia Foundation Global Ban? It’s obvious to anyone the guy is a notorious troll and internet harasser.ODS (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
The “harassing emails” are here. As can be seen, Oliver wrote to me, not the other way around. He didn’t like how I responded, attacked, and then the mails stopped. He never said, “Don ‘t write me.” I did not continue writing him after he stopped writing me, I did not reply to his last mail. So, again, he was lying about “harassing emails” sent to him. He is harassed by his own mind.
This is a list of accounts alleged to be socks of Michael Coombs (Mikemikev), by Oliver D Smith, on RationalWikiWiki, archived here.
Some background: When a highly motivated user is blocked, the creation of socks, especially on RationalWiki, is to be expected. It is to some extent encouraged there. The identification of socks by the “duck test” can be confused by impersonation socks.
Impersonation socks are intended to resemble the target. They may exhibit behaviors or text known to be of the target. The purpose of an impersonation sock is to impugn the target, to attract anger, bans or the like. As well, impersonation socks may be used to bury open socks in confusion. They are often also troll socks. Impersonation socks are a form of identity theft. Oliver Smith has listed some accounts here as belonging to Mikemikev that were actually his. This is, then, a form of impersonation socking, but not trollsocking.
Open socks are — and claim to be — a real person (or an additional account of a user). They are whom they seem to be. Open socks will inform a community or individuals, or argue for the position of the user behind them.
Parody socks may use the name of another user, or a prior account name of the user, but are not intended to be mistaken for the user. These are sometimes loosely called “impersonations,” but are not identity theft.
Trollsocks are created to poke and provoke, trollsocks expect to be quickly blocked. They may be identified by their targets, but impersonation socks are often troll socks. Thus sanctioning a target because of troll socking runs the risk of serving the defamatory purposes of the sock owner.
Alternate socks are socks intended to continue participation in a project. They may conceal identity. They do not intend to be blocked. These socks are deliberately non-disruptive.
Oliver Smith calls them all “socks” and lists many socks as an accusation of disruption, which is ironic, because he has created many, many socks himself.
Socking is generally harmful to wikis because it makes it more difficult to detect long-term harmful behavior. But RationalWiki, in particular, through its policies, has encouraged extensive confusion over user identity. Impersonation socking is defamation, it is a form of lying to harm, and may be illegal in some cases. Other kinds of socking may even be beneficial. Parody socking is uncivil, but RationalWiki is grossly uncivil, commonly.
I have corrected formatting errors in the list, and alphabetized and numbered it. Socks are coded in this way:
Pink is Oliver Smith, as identified by me. In some cases, these have been openly admitted, or facts admitted which led to a clear conclusion. Others are duck test, often very obvious.
Blue is Darryl L. Smith, as suspected by me. There is no reason to identify these with Mikemikev, and it is unlikely; he may perceive me as an ally (though we have little agreement on politics). (Many more like this remain to be tagged).
Funman1 [renamed user Bongolian gets beaten up by Lulzkiller and Nate Spidgwood whilst Sam Smith smokes a cigar and shoves it in Rome Viharos dirty head|Bongolian gets beaten up by Lulzkiller and Nate Spidgwood whilst Sam Smith smokes]
Funman3 [renamed userJytdog Viharo Oliver Smith Lulzkiller Donny Long Nate Spidgwood David Gerard in a boxing match with cheese pizza on their heads and Sam Smith as the ref with a diaper on WeeGees face|Jytdog Viharo Oliver Smith Lul
If reading this on an archive site, check the original URL for updates.
Studying alleged Mikemikev socks, I came across Saxton. This account looked like Oliver Smith, but there were some oddities. Then I found some material that had been deleted, which is copied here. This material appeared to reveal Saxton as Oliver without any reasonable doubt; however, there are also signs that this could be his brother Darryl L. Smith, specifically the initial interest in Gerhard D. Wassermann and Rupert Sheldrake.
Saxton was never blocked (until today, 5 years later, by Oliver), but added material considered to be doxxing, to Talk:BonesandBehaviors. This material was hidden. Any person named on this page may request that information be hidden; at the very least, persons named here have a right of response. (Comment at the bottom of the page, include a valid email address, which will not be published. Important comments will be incorporated into the text, if identity can be verified.)
This material may be libelous. Please handle with caution. Saxton was accused of being Michael Coombs, by Oliver, but the identity of Saxton as a Smith brother. Oliver often speaks about himself in the third person as he did here. or this was his brother about him. The overall presentation here of Oliver is to justify his behavior and make his actions appear reasonable. The page:
Admin Bonesandbehaviours is neo-nazi kook
The Admin Bonesandbehaviours is the user Faintsmile1992 from Anthroscape (the same person who advertised the forum Bonesandbehaviours, see  and ). They removed/blanked their Anthroscape account which described their politics as “fascism” in Dec 2013, and as of 2014 now pose online as an apolitical HBD/”race realist” or something like that. However across the net on other sites, they still have their former political views left up:
Faintsmile @ Forumbiodiversity Last Online 2012-08-19 @ 06:45: Politics: Fascism.
Bonesandbehaviours (Faintsmile1992) was openly fascist and neo-nazi only a year or so back. They attempted though to erase their internet history as Faintsmile and now even deny being Faintsmile1992 presumably embarrassed or ashamed of their earlier online activities and far-right politics.Saxton (talk) 15:13, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Metapedia, Henry Stevens, Atlantid and Faintsmile1992
It is interesting to note what happened between the forum Bonesandbehaviours and Metapedia. There are still postings recorded there. One of Metapedia‘s former sysops “Atlantid” (aka BookWorm at Wikipedia, also BookGremlin at Forumbiodiversity) had joined BonesandBehaviours. He later revealed himself to be suffering from schizophrenia, and left Metapedia and Forumbiodiversity. Most his contributions were on science based or anthropology articles surrounding race, in fact he seems most responsible for the content added there (see for example these entries: , ). Anyway, the guy given his mental illness and excessive amount of edits held no consistent view on what he was adding. He was even accused of being a “race denialist” despite administrating the white supremacist site (Metapedia) and seems to have led a war against “race typologists” receiving criticism from HBD sites like Anthroscape. Very bizarre to say the least, and his edits at Wikipedia also are just as strange – focused around Assyriology fringe figures like Laurence Waddell (adding the Bowl of Utu artefact). After joining the forum Bonesandbehaviours, he seems to have first uncovered the real identity of the Admin Bonesandbehaviours as the neo-nazi Faintsmile1992. This led to his ban (?) at the forum and Bonesandbehaviours only moderator Henry Stevens (who posts as “fivepercenter” on the forum) contacting Metapedia, posting the following:
“Dear Metapedia, My name is Henry Stevens. By way of introduction I am the author of three books dealing with esoteric Nazi technology: Hitler’s Flying Saucers Hitler’s Suppressed and Still-Secret Weapons, Science and Technology Dark Star All available at Amazon.com I also have an interest and education in Physical Anthropology and am a moderator at the anthropology forum, Bones and Behaviours. I also have an interest and education in Physical Anthropology and am a moderator at the anthropology forum, Bones and Behaviours www.w11zetaboards.com/bonesandbehaviours For a couple months we have had a member, “Gremlin”, Oliver Smith is a moderator or some kind of official with Metapedia. Things were fine until recently. In an emotional fit, “Gremlin” began sending personal messages and making posts on the open forum about our Administrator, “BonesandBehaviours” or as she is known elsewhere “Faintsmile1992. In those posts Oliver Smith stated our Administrator was a paedophile. He went on in graphic and lewd detail about her alleged crimes with underage boys. It was so graphic and lewd as to be utterly disgusting. I know our Administrator. She is 20 or just 21 years old. She has an opposite sex preference for males younger than herself. But she has never, ever, even once, engaged in any sexual activity with anyone who is under legal age of consent. This means any and all sexual activity. Your Moderator, Smith, has alleged otherwise in print, in pubic, on the internet. In the United States, to allege illegal or immoral sexual activity without proof or conviction is libel. Libel is a legal term and to be found guilty of libel in court and alleging illegal or immoral sexual activity constitutes damages, prima facie. This means damages are present if the claim has been made and can be shown to have been made. “Damages” mean a money judgment award. Of course, nobody wants to do this. Having removed Gremlin from our forum, what I am asking is that he act like a gentleman and refrain from repeating this improper activity on the other forums of which he is a part. I am told he represents himself at Metapedia as a “White Nationalist” and on other forums. On BonesandBehaviours he repeatedly made negative comments about any site with those beliefs. What this means is I do not know who he is or where he will pop up. This is why I am writing you. I am asking that you use your considerable influence in the on-line world toward the goal of Oliver being a gentleman. I know this is an unusual request. It would not be made except for the fact that Oliver is someone in the academic world and someone in the Metapedia world and someone of this stature should embrace this status and not sink beneath himself. Thank you for your anticipated understanding and cooperation. Yours truly, Henry Stevens.
Atlantid (BookGremlin) whose real name is alleged to be Oliver Smith responded that these accusations were not libel, and that the Admin BonesandBehaviours (as Faintsmile1992) had posted at Anthroscape many obscene comments about how she supports sex between grown adults and children as young as 11 or 12, while having done that herself with a minor and her goal of trying legalize the age of consent to 12. All of these comments appear still logged at Anthroscape under Faintsmile1992‘s post history (covering more than 7000 posts going back three or more years), and so it appears Atlantid was not a liar at all. Perhaps that is another reason why Bonesandbehaviours is denying they are Faintsmile1992 (other than ashamed of their neo-nazi past)? Are they fearful of the legal consequences of what they have posted? No action however has ever been taken.
Bonesandbehaviours most recent response to this at Hbdchick‘s blog was the following in response to another poster pointing out the obvious that Bonesandbehaviours is the same person as Faintsmile1992:
The only thread on me and my family members over at any Wiki is the result of cyberstalking by a confused individual called Oliver Smith who is being compared to a sectioned individual known as Ian Keith Gomeche due to his absurd and antisocial behaviours that are perhaps consistent with the Borderline Personality Disorder. When he is banned from a forum, he begins spreading lies to defame other internet users, ranging from accusations of creationism to paedophilia. Whilst this may be standard trolling, he crosses a line by dragging in family members and other innocent bystanders.
He drags in family members and abuses wikis so as to harass people. His page on me over at Metapedia was removed when Metapedia was threatened with legal action by a moderator who, I believe, has also contacted RationalWiki. ED can expect the same kind of action unless they stop stalkers from abusing their wiki so as to get back at people who have banned them, by using it to spread false information.
It is not clear as to whrpether he is associated with the Afrocentrist Charlie Bass, or whether Charlie Bass is merely imitating Atlantid/Oliver Smith/other sock puppets of his. Bass has been harassing people by ask.fm because we do not agree with his strange Afrocentrist positions, and created a defamatory post saying that the B&B forum was founded by a holocaust denier. This is clearly a lie, as is the confusion (following Oliver Smith) between me and other internet users.
FTR faintsmile1992 is my cousin who was helping me out but backed out of the project. We do not even have the same personalities as one another. I have never had a neo-nazi blog nor ever posted anywhere as ‘shewolfoftheSS’.
I naturally object to misinformation dragging in innocent people, so as to encourage harassment, otherwise the best course of action with both the mentally ill and ideological fanatics is to ignore them.
True, Atlantid has some sort of personality disorder, however I see no “cyberstalking” or trolling here. Bonesandbehaviours is Faintsmile1992, which is obvious from posting style, interests and so forth alone. Bonesanbehaviours also admitted they are Faintsmile1992 in a post to Metapedia:
On our community Atlantid was acting reasonably and we were even supportive about his ebook project and offered him advice, until faintsmile1992 refuted his deliberate misrepresentation of Thomas Malthus, objected to his support for the abortion holocaust of white babies and disagreed with his personal biews on eugenics. Which is the point at which he began to behave out of line and started trolling our staff. As he was put on moderation for this, he started immediately to send malicious PMs to our forum staff and members, and got himself IP banned. It is only then that he attempted to dox our member on the Metapedia though he has been speaking to her politely for months. Many of our members of our Bones and Behaviours community, including faintsmile1992 who has enrolled to study anthropology and psychology with the OU, are pro-white, race realist students who do not wish unwelcome attention that haunts them when they are active in the future. Others are pseudonymous academics or members from older race forums. Our members do not deserve this because Atlantid cannot behave correctly. It is unfair.
The thread where Atlantid supposedly debated Faintsmile1992 on Thomas Malthus, only also involved the Admin Bonesandbehaviours (both then admit to being the same person) and note the comment “faintsmile1992 who has enrolled to study anthropology and psychology with the OU, are pro-white, race realist students” because Bonesandbehaviours also claims to have enrolled to take anthropology and psychology with the OU on several blogs (e.g. . Just a coincidence that both Faintsmile1992 and Bonesanbehaviors are taking the exact same course from the same place? I think not. You can also simply check Faintsmile1992’s post history at Anthroscape to see Atlantid and the poster at HBDchick’s blog was not making anything up. Saxton (talk) 21:11, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Henry Stevens (“fivepercenter”) like Bonesandbehaviours is also trying to hide their neo-nazi identity. Mr Stevens has recently changed his ethnicity to: “Southeast Asian”. This is despite the fact Mr. Stevens is a white American as can be seen here: Henry Stevens – Nazi flying saucer’s where he is giving an interview about Nazi UFO’s he claims the American government is suppressing (yes, a right crackpot). Saxton (talk) 22:38, 19 May 2014 (UTC)