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.
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!]
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. 188.8.131.52 (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. 184.108.40.206 (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. 220.127.116.11 (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. 18.104.22.168 (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. 22.214.171.124 (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. 126.96.36.199 (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 188.8.131.52 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. 184.108.40.206 (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. 220.127.116.11 (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. 18.104.22.168 (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. 22.214.171.124 (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.
(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.
Some process details. (needs updating)
The display sections from the Sept 2 post. Used to detect new comments plus count other comments
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)
If you read this on an archive site, be sure to check the original URL for corrections and comments.
This page was recovered from an archive of Wrongpedia, set up as not archivable by archive.is.
This material includes statements I know to be false and possibly defamatory.
It is hosted here for purposes of historical study. If anyone is defamed here, removal will be considered. The right of response by mentioned persons is guaranteed, clearly false statements will be redacted, and allegedly false statements will be flagged as such. Comments are open.
This page is believed to have been created by Oliver D. Smith, who refers to himself in it.
Wyatt aka BjornStronginthearm aka Merkel is a deranged white supremacist internet troll, cyber-harasser and conspiracy theorist crackpot who administrates Rightpedia. He is known to impersonate people on different accounts, but then tries to blame his impersonations onto innocent people. He is friends with Rightpedia admin Mikemikev.
RaiderFan is Merkel (=Wyatt on Rightpedia), who is impersonating me on that account [I used the name “RaiderFan” on another wiki; Merkel signed up that same name here and has pretended to be me in early edits and note how he also edited Rightpedia. The above evidence was recently put together by JuniusThaddeus a former RW sysop and the impersonation is mentioned on Merkel’s page.
Oliver D. Smith sockpuppets is a conspiracy-theory-esque article about RationalWiki filled with misinformation, written by the troll Mikemikev on the wiki Rightpedia. The article lists 38 RationalWiki accounts and falsely states they are owned by Oliver D. Smith, furthermore that this is only 1% of the total… the absurd allegation is Smith owns 3800 accounts. In reality, Smith owns only a tiny fraction of the accounts; Mikemikev is known to impersonate Smith on sockpuppetsand so some, or even many of these listed accounts are Mikemikev himself.
Misinformation. While there may be errors on that page, most of the “information” — reported fact — is correct.
Owned by Oliver D. Smith. It does not state that, though one might think so from the title. These are “Smith” accounts and could be either brother.
1%, absurd allegation was not intended to be accurate, obviously. It is in the title of a section, as “about 1%,” obviously informal. Any study of possible Smith socks runs into masses of trollsocks, pursuing Smith agenda by attacking Smith enemies. Mikemikev is assuming these were Smith brother socks, as have I, most of them. Not all, and some level of impersonation is possible, but not what Oliver claims, and generally not from the source that Oliver claims.
Tiny fraction. Smith acknowledges 8/38 accounts, or 21%. That is not a “tiny fraction.”
Mikemikev himself. None of these accounts appear to be Mikemikev.
In May 2018 Smith contacted Mikemikev on Gab requesting him to remove the ridiculous article; Mikemikev said he isn’t interested in fact-checking who owns all these accounts and admitted to mistakes and lying; he also didn’t deny impersonating Smith, but that he will still blame them all on Smith to abuse Google searches of his name.
Notes (Abd): This list from Rightpedia was a list of “Smith” socks, edited from an earlier page on Oliver Smith socks, but the name not corrected to generalize it. Oliver knows many of his brother’s accounts, but does not disclose this here, thus amplifying his message of massive impersonation. This all has other implications.
Code: light green, Abd confirmed suspect Oliver Code: light blue, Abd confirmed suspect Darryl
Notice how no evidence is presented Smith owns any of these accounts, but in numerous cases it is easy to prove accounts aren’t his, for example Georgie Enkoom is a practising Muslim from Canada and obviously isn’t Smith. Mikemikev’s has a history of creating accounts impersonating ANTIFAs, or so-called SJWs; the accounts with ANTIFA/anti-fascist/Hope Not Hate in their usernames above are easy to identify as his for his sockpuppet history, while others appear to be impersonating Smith more directly.With very few exceptions, Smith’s real accounts (†) usually have names related to classics (Aeschylus, Callimachus, Nemean) or video games he plays (Agent 47, i.e. Hitman), but at least one account (not listed above) is an impersonation based on this.
There’s unfortunately no check-user tool on RationalWiki, like on Wikipedia; this means the only way to identify someone’s account is by behaviour (e.g. editing habits) and not by technical evidence such as IP checks.
No evidence was blatantly false if we look at the original page. There was evidence, plus a contributions link is evidence, often cited as such on Wikipedia. (“X is a sock of Y, see contributions for evidence.”)
Easy to prove is deceptive. It is far easier to show conclusive evidence that an account is someone than to show evidence it is not that person, because people can present differing behaviors.
“is a practicing Muslim” is a good example. How do we know that user is a practicing Muslim? Well, he said he was. Therefore . . . therefore what? Numerous trollsocks appeared attacking me, claiming to be Muslim. Unlikely that they were. I reviewed this user’s edits and he might be a Muslim. I was inclined to accept the claim, but I’d need to be more thorough to be sure and there might not be enough evidence.
History of creating accounts impersonating, absent evidence, is assuming the conclusion. It’s also irrelevant. True impersonation socks, distinct from parody socks, show certain characteristics and function in certain ways (or they are harmless).
appear to be impersonating Smith more directly. None of the accounts here resemble any impersonation socks I have seen. Two are trollsocks, JonDonis which I’ve tagged as Darryl because of resemblance to many such Darryl trollsocks in the past, and RaiderFan. see below. Could those be someone else? Of course, but context, man!
impersonation based on this. Raider Fan was trolling Oliver by using an old account name of his. Not impersonation.
No check-user. The checkuser extension allows easy reading of IP and user agent, but there is even more information in raw access logs.
Smith once atypically created a throwaway account with a name unlike all his others; he edited on this account for only a single day in February 2016. Rightpedia and Abd‘s blog claim this account name BenStiegmans was an impersonation of an individual named Benjamin Steigmann, however it clearlywasn’t as the names are visibly different, Smith never claimed to be anyone else and even had no prior communication with the person he was supposed to have impersonated; Rightpedia/Abd are either lying or have a reading comprehension problem.
Clearly wasn’t. No, it is not “clear” that it wasn’t impersonation. It obviously resembles an impersonation. A difference in a name like that can exist in an impersonation. To take this to an extreme, Oliver has claimed that the RatWiki account Some random Smith was an impersonation of him. It’s preposterous, but it shows that he realizes that a name need not be identical to be an impersonation.
Never claimed to be anyone else. Ah, see this page: anglo-pyramidologist/impersonation-books/ Some books appeared with impersonated authors. A photoshop of a very obese man with my face pasted on it, created by Oliver, was used for the book. So maybe that was Darryl. But Oliver was involved. And who was Bill Connors? The focus and interest was Oliver.
No prior communication. Deceptive, as if prior communication with the person is necessary for an impersonation. The real issue would be prior knowledge, and he does not claim lack of that, but if he did claim that, could he be lying?
Lying or … comprehension problem. Oliver often claims that, because he wrote something, and they don’t believe him, they have a comprehension problem. Yet Oliver has lied and has admitted it, and then never committed to clearing up his lies. He just admits lying to create more confusion. He does not say why he chose that name. My opinion:
He chose the name because he wanted Emil Kirkegaard to blame Steigmann. This is a common Smith tactic. It’s worked often enough that the Smiths keep doing it. If that was the motive, this was a true impersonation.
↑ However this is clearly a problem when someone is impersonated!
List of socks. The link was defective, he meant this, a list complied by Krom (Oliver), trolling Mikemikev, totally inappropriate. It does not show impersonation, and no actual evidence was shown this was Mike. For example, Social Justice Warrior was not shown to be Mike, because there could be dozens of people who might do the like of it. The account was trolling, like Social Justice Internet Scientist. An impersonation account is intended to be seen as the target. Who was being impersonated?
Raider Fan. This was also a trolling account. The name is taken from Oliver, but this account was not impersonating Oliver at all, it was attacking Oliver. Again, no showing this was Mikemikev except weak circumstantial evidence, and this account does not demonstrate “impersonation,” as such, merely parody and trolling.
Wrongpedia. The link was defective. Wrongpedia was designed to defeat archive.is. Oliver obviously did not check the link. However, I anticipated that Wrongpedia might vanish as it did, and archived it. This is a copy of that page, obviously written by Oliver. Remarkably, Oliver accuses Raider Fan of being Wyatt, not Mikemikev.
Problem. Behavior can be imitated, text can be copied. Socks impersonating me on RatWiki often have copied text from me, then added threats or the like, or simply spammed the text to irritate the Rats. However, if context is considered, IP evidence is certainly not the only strong evidence. I’m not going to reveal all the techniques, but some of the evidence I have would be strong enough to show fact beyond any reasonable doubt. Some is circumstantial, adequate still to claim fact absent contradiction.
Recent Reddit throwaway accounts have claimed that other throwaway accounts were Mikemikev, impersonating Oliver Smith. Looking over some of this, I realized that I’d never looked carefully at the 592 contributions of MrStrong on Encyclopedia Dramatica. MrStrong was clearly Oliver, nobody else on the planet would argue as he did, nobody else is so expert on how he thinks, and has the personal knowledge he has. It would be a major effort to create an impersonation of a schizophrenic at this level.
After first editing the article on Michael Coombs, his nemesis, to eliminate mention of Oliver Smith, he made an admin request. Quite simply, Mikemikev would not do this. At all. Not even if drunk. He does not exactly admit that he is Oliver in that post but an expert on Oliver (JuniusThaddeus, aka Michael D. Suarez, MDS) points it out, and Smith then calls him a liar for pointing out obvious facts, with links.
Familiar pattern, recently repeated.
He attacks MDS with an admin request, lying. What Oliver has found is that lying in admin requests sometimes works, even if blatant, and at that point, he has almost nothing at stake with the account. Because that admin page is seriously NSFW, here is the request without the page.
Then this discussion clearly acknowledges being a Smith brother, who else would fit? He uses the first person in a context where he knows MDS believes he is Oliver Smith, and he never denies that, he only wants the “lies about him” removed. If anyone needs more evidence, ask, comments are open. This is Oliver D. Smith.
So what I found, first, this edit which certainly looked interesting from the summary. He referred to the previous edit, where he added a list of suspected socks from Mikemikev’s bio of him, claiming those were all impersonations, but then he removed “the only 1 or 2 that were actually mine” reverting this text that came from Mike’s Rightpedia article, as alleged Smith socks there:
Aeschylus (reverted and then his other sock Debunking_spiritualism jumps in to defend). Oliver later admitted this was one of his accounts.
Of course he needed to remove those. He was currently running Aeschylus as an open Oliver Smith account, in order to request deletions of articles he created. Unfortunately for his credibility, the creators of the articles are visible, and this confirmed what had been previously suspected (by many!), that those accounts were also Oliver. Debunking spiritualism, though, was also not Oliver, it was Darryl, his brother, so of course he did not want to accuse his brother of being Mikemikev!
Now, he could later claim that this was Eencyclopedia Dramatica, where, he believes, they lie about people. But Oliver does not understand the difference between fact and interpretation. ED interprets the behavior of people to ridicule them, but long term has never intended to “lie” about people; still, as a wiki, all kinds of crap can exist. So he will claim that he was just ridiculing, that none of it was supposed to be true. But …
He referred to a complete list on RWW, that he had compiled, as “Oliver D Smith,” and there, he was writing for the RW community. This was not on ED, though it was to be standard RW snark. Again, he later claimed that this RWW account was a Mikemikev sock, pointing to the RW account by the same name — which was probably an impersonation, very likely Mikemikev. I was watching that RWW account, led there by links from RatWiki. It was Oliver, there is no reasonable doubt.
So Oliver is fully responsible for that RWW list. I have copied it to a subpage here, and annotated it.
The most obvious, prominent deception on ED was this edit, 15:10, 4 October 2018 summary (octo is mikemikev latest impersonation account https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User:Octo)
What I see here is that Octo decided to move to a new account, so “outed” Octo as Mikemikev (which was preposterous). That last edit a few hours later was just a template for Welsh users. Is Mikemikev Welsh? The generic goal is to create confusion. There is no doubt about Octo being Oliver.
What this all shows is that Oliver lies about impersonations, claiming that he was impersonated, when accounts were really him. And that list he put up is full of those (but also of accounts that were his brother). I found a few possible errors, but Mikemikev was mostly correct according to my own research.
RationalWiki Smith brothers conspiracy theory is a paranoid speculation by some individuals with RationalWiki articles, written about themselves, that maintains their articles were created by a duo or trio of brothers (with the surname Smith) from a single household. According to this conspiracy theory — the brothers have created tens, if not hundreds of RationalWiki articles as “hit pieces” to damage people’s reputations via a Google search.
In December 2016 an article appeared on the troll website Encyclopædia Dramatica named the “Smith Brothers” that argued a household of brothers with the surname Smith use RationalWiki in order to bash people online by creating articles to discredit them, by writing about their pseudoscience or irrational beliefs (which actually is in the stated mission of RationalWiki: “documenting the full range of crank ideas”). The article itself was nonsensical, filled with gay pornographic imagery; its purpose was arguably to satirize RationalWiki skeptic editors. The NSFW-porn article was deleted within a few weeks. Before deletion there were some screenshots on an archive webpage.
The folks over at Skeptiko and Pscience Quest discovered the archived screenshots of the Smith Brothers article in September 2017 and absurdly read it as being factual, thus they think there really is a household of brothers who have created most the RationalWiki articles on paranormalists, creationists, psychic-believers and other pseudoscientists over a 5 year time period (2012-2017). Laird Shaw openly links to the gay-porn article on Pscience Quest and recommends readers of the forum he administrates – go there to see evidence for the Smith Brother conspiracy theory.
The short-lived ED Smith Brothers article purported to provide evidence as “connecting the dots” linking the brothers to multiple RationalWiki users and dozens of article creations; in reality, this consisted of unsubstantiated allegations and zero technical proof (note: RationalWiki has no check-user tool to confirm sockpuppetry), with some gay porn thrown in for good measure. This however has not stopped Rome Viharo quoting the article as “proof” for the conspiracy theory on his website Wikipedia We Have a Problem, that has 100,000 words of gibberish dedicated to the Smith brothers. Viharo has also discussed his belief in the conspiracy theory in his YouTube videos.
[the original references section was lost in archiving; however, there was only one reference, and it is simulated here, as what it might have been at that point in time. On the other hand, it may have been a more innocuous page.]
Unless it was in that reference, this page contained no outing, so the suppression reason was incorrect. The arguments given in the article are still being advanced by Oliver Smith, just today.
As I pointed out at the time, this was a Smith brothers version of the Smith brothers conspiracy theory. But that’s RatWiki. It was treated, though, as if written by a Smith enemy, to harass innocent Rats being accused of being a Smith brother. Like most of what has been written by the Smiths, it was deceptive.
a paranoid speculation by some individuals with RationalWiki articles, written about themselves, that maintains their articles were created by a duo or trio of brothers (with the surname Smith) from a single household.
Oliver Smith subsequently acknowledged many of his article creations. However, the duck test is not a “paranoid speculation.” By looking at article editors, and then at the contributions of each, patterns of interest popped up. An article would be created with many edits. Then there would be sporadic edits by other users who did not show the patterns appearing. Then another account with many edits, whose other contributions showed the same interests. There were two sets of interests, quite distinct. This matched old claims on Wikipedia from the brothers, and other evidences.
Nobody has claimed a trio that I have seen. They are twins, both born in 1990, and living in the same house at one time, i.e., with apparent parents, same surname. Public records were published in a number of places. The Smiths have been attacking others since something like 2012, if not before, and they have managed, over time, to alienate many. Oliver is the most visible of the brothers, has an actual peer-reviewed article (on Atlantis) published in his real name. The brother, Darryl L. Smith, is far less visible and has never openly revealed his name.
The article on me was written by Darryl, who had attacked a Wikiversity user and then threatened me with retribution, and the first sign of the retribution was that article. Shortly after the “conspiracy” article was deleted, Skeptical placed in the article:
RationalWiki conspiracy theory
Lomax was perm-banned from RationalWiki for doxxing and trolling. He now uses his personal blog to spread a paranoid conspiracy theory and misinformation that a group of RationalWiki editors who live in the same house (yes, you read that correctly) created and edited his RW article.
Note 36 refers to my block log. I was blocked by Skeptical. Who was Skeptical? Oliver Smith, of course, the signs are unmistakeable. Note 37 refers to my blog.
(These are not the only socks of the Smith brothers active in the period since my article was written, just the ones that edited the article on me.)
According to this conspiracy theory — the brothers have created tens, if not hundreds of RationalWiki articles as “hit pieces” to damage people’s reputations via a Google search.
Oliver Smith has certainly created more than “tens” of articles, and describing them as hit pieces would not be an exaggeration. My article was clearly created to damage reputation, and has been used that way, heavily. Others, the same. This is not a “conspiracy theory,” and the brothers do not necessarily coordinate, but . . . it is likely that both of them complained to the WikiMedia Foundation. Oliver bragged about it, in fact, though Darryl actually organized the other complainants.
Always be suspicious when something asserted by many and allegedly “believed” by many is claimed to be without evidence. That is the claim of deniers, and the guilty.
ED is satirical, yes, but I did not take fact from there without careful independent verification, and most evidence I have found directly on WMF wikis, RatWiki, and then email from Oliver himself, and his comments on ED, and other miscellaneous sources.
(Pages written about the Smiths often have what I consider errors. They have created, over the years, an heavy smokescreen, with, yes, hundreds of accounts — that is not at all an exaggeration, though 700 on RationalWiki might be, unless we include impersonation and trollsocks they created, which they have done at a high rate at various times — like what they are doing on Reddit as this is written — so errors are understandable. I considered the no-brother-all-Oliver theory, but find it difficult to fit it to the facts.)
its purpose was arguably to satirize RationalWiki skeptic editors.
Oliver and Darryl hide behind “skeptics.” Skepticism is essential to science, and my purpose in documenting the impersonations and deception is not at all to attack genuine skepticism, nor even to attack pseudoskepticism, though I write on that topic (just as some skeptics write about pseudoscience.) The ED article was not written to satirize skeptics, in general, and did not mock the Smiths for skepticism, at all. But the Smiths are constantly working to convince other Rats that they are under attack by enemies of RatWiki and of rational skepticism, while they create cause for others to attack, well beyond the necessities of the RatWiki mission.
That would mostly be Darryl. “Household of brothers” is language chosen to make it seem ridiculous. These are twin brothers, and apparently do not live in the same household, but were checkuser-connected back in the day when one of the brothers was away at college but visited home and accessed the internet.
The brothers have supported each other at times, but are also independent. Darryl has offended “paranormalists”, sure, but more recently has moved into diet and medicine and is attacking people with resources (as he did on Wikipedia with alternative medicine, that’s how Rome Viharo got involved). Oliver has gone after alleged racists and white supremacists — often marginal, but when he tacked in “pedophile” he set up a world of hurt for himself as well as his targets.
this consisted of unsubstantiated allegations and zero technical proof (note: RationalWiki has no check-user tool to confirm sockpuppetry)
Much in the various versions of the ED articles I have seen was supported by evidence. The claim of ” zero technical proof” is common, one more of their deceptions. My original study was entirely based on Wikipedia and WMF steward checkuser evidence, supplemented by some of my own and that of others. As well, some checkuser evidence was published from ED (but that was later, as was some checkuser evidence provided from Conservapedia for Oliver trolling there.)
(When they troll a blog, sometimes the blogger checks IP, that’s easy, WordPress shows it to admins for comments.)
As well, it’s true that RatWiki does not have the checkuser extension installed, but any tech with access to the raw access logs can see not only the same data, but more. I have technical evidence! Those who depend on hiding are depending on something that reality tends to dislike. Not safe.
There are actually many people who have independently investigated the Smiths. Oliver himself confirmed much of the brother story in email to me, but then claimed he had been lying for years, there was no brother. Either way, then, that the story would exist is not a “conspiracy theory” but a conclusion from apparent fact, which is all we ever have anyway, with degrees of reliability.
So either people are not confused and there is a reality to the “brother” story, or the person creating confusion by lying is blaming people for being confused, which is simply more lying. Neat, eh?
You can delete this message if you like. Just to let you know I will not be further engaging you. It seems you live for this drama, I will not longer be involved.
Perhaps he lied, or was impersonated. Notice, however, that the next sentence contradicts “not longer be involved.”
I will do my best behind the scenes via email to get admins to delete all your material.
He did, and he sort-of-succeeded. That is, the SPA study material was deleted on Wikiversity (with my consent, moved to meta) and later on meta (because by that time it was moved to this blog). He got two educational resources on Wikiversity deleted, the one on cold fusion (which I did not start, but I had heavily added to it, and the resource on Parapsychology, both of which were rescued and moved to the CFC wiki, kept for historical reasons, along with user pages that had been cited, for example, on Wikipedia.
It turned out that filing private complaints, sometimes from multiple accounts — and he recruits others to complain, was his long-term MO — can work.
The Smiths have bragged about getting web sites taken down that dared to criticize them. They learned how to do this over the years. Administrators are human, often over-worked and certainly, on wikis, underpaid. If they get complaints from what appear to be multiple users (and sometimes they are more than one!), they do not investigate deeply, it is too much work. They just push buttons.
If you want to spend the rest of your life stalking someone that is up to you, but it is not healthy. I object to such a thing. I am done with this.
Again, a lie. He was certainly not finished, and this claim was contradicted by “doing his best.” As it happened, the Wikiversity and meta disruption largely disappeared, but then an article was created on me on RationalWiki by a new user who had obviously done an incredible amount of research. I was a sysop on RatWiki at that time. That ended very quickly without abuse of tools. And, again, that was, it turned out, an old pattern.
I would like to add though that AngloPyramidologist is innocent.
“Anglo Pyramidologist” was the Wikipedia account of Oliver D. Smith, the namesake of the Sock Puppet Investigation Archive.
If you want the debunker of parapsychology/or pseudoscience it is me. I have debated Ben in the past, he knows who I am, I have talked to him on Wikipedia in 2014.
And at other times. Here is a screenshot of a Facebook conversation, which I found on Wikiversity, having been posted by Ben long ago. The claims there are remarkable, partially confirming what is below. But the Smiths routinely lie, so none of it can be trusted. It is clear, though, that these were not Mikemikev impersonations, as later claimed. Mikemikev was in conflict with Oliver Smith (since 2012), not Darryl, and would have had no motive for the verified disruption.
I have nothing against Ben personally, unfortunately he uses Wikipedia to promote his fringe beliefs, he promised in 2014 not to come back but his mistake was coming back in 2017.
I created the Wikiversity resource partly so that Ben had a place to do constructive work, and that plan worked. The edits in 2017 were mistakes, yes, but harmless. This was the account Darryl used to file the SPI. Notice “globally locked.” The original filing. It outs the RL identity for Blastikus. Nobody seems to have noticed. Blastikus had used his real name for the Wikiversity account.
It’s a bit confused but these accounts were suspected, my comments in all caps. Green account was or was probably Steigmann:
This was an outrageous filing. I have marked self-reverted edits (pink), and stale accounts (With a new SUL account, created for Wikiversity, it is easy to accidentally edit Wikipedia even though blocked there. Did he realize what he was doing? I’m not sure.) They used to deny checkuser requests like this, especially from an SPA who admits he has an account, but is socking. There was an account on Wikiversity that had attacked Steigmann and the resource there. He was socking to conceal his prior interaction, and nobody seems to have noticed.
In any case, nobody was exercised about trivial socking at worst, mostly stale, so he then “must” get attention, so he impersonated, on many accounts. And it worked! Nobody looked at the obvious source of disruption, but only at the blocked user, and why? Well, he’s interested in parapsychology, and aren’t all such people insane?
After that, the filings were amended to show more socks and many highly disruptive impersonation socks, and the troll was clearly pushing for action to ban Steigmann on Wikiversity. What was totally against tradition there, but . . . he and his friends did pull it off! Even after the impersonation had been exposed.
Btw I do object to the ‘troll’ allegations. I have written over 250 articles on Wikipedia. As to this very day 30/9/2017 I have four Wikipedia accounts and 12 others I occasionally use, the admins are only interested in banning vandals. If you are atheist, pro-skeptic like me and debunking fringe beliefs the admins love us. I can’t go wrong.
He has admitted creating socks that trolled for outraged response on Wikipedia. He was checkuser-identified with massive troll socking. So he is a troll. How many so-called “good hand” accounts he has is irrelevant.
He admitted massive socking on Wikipedia, with undiscovered socks. Was this an impersonator? It is implausible. He could easily be lying (and he uses lies to create useless hunts for non-existent accounts, and he will blow an actual account and set it up to blame it on someone else, another enemy, by creating accusations on various web sites that the account is His Enemy, and then “retiring” because he was allegedly outed on those web sites. That worked also, until I blew it up by identifying who really was that account.
If he partitions his access, he could survive checkuser. The stewards only came up with the many attackers of Ben Steigmann and me on Wikiversity and this particular troll, plus two Commons accounts, one of which I tracked to RationalWiki, not to Wikipedia. So if he was active on Wikipedia at that time, it was partitioned (i.e., using distinct access, it is not difficult to do, if one makes no mistakes.)
His comment about Wikipedia admin interests is unfortunately true to a degree. That Blastikus filing shows it.
He is POV-pushing, very obviously, but those who push that particular POV are often considered useful there, even though a later WP account was called a “POV pusher” by Jimbo Wales. Their POV is not a “scientific point of view,” as they claim. Science has no POV and is not pseudoskeptical, science is not a body of belief, but a method and an approach, as well as a body of evidence.
This troll is fascist, in the original sense, suppressing opinions different from his, and willing to use deception and disruption to do so. He was able to find several allies, among the Wikipedians.
I was even offered paid work from the owner of a skeptic group.
Later, when there is mention of the possibility of payment, they cry “Lies!” And they use arguments similar to what was argued (see below) with a steward. “No proof!”
I still create articles perhaps 12 or so a week. I have serious knowledge and I have improved the Wikipedia in skeptical related articles in relation to fringe beliefs. Your statement we are all vandals or doing illegal activity is false. Take care and Good bye. My advise for you would be to give up. You are fighting a war you cannot win. You will never work out who I am or get rid of me from Wikipedia. Leon. From a tower (talk) 01:24, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
I notice that the Facebook user who was taunting Ben (linked above) — similarly to this! — was Leon Kennedy. Not his name, I’m sure, but this is probably the same person.
Abd has created a hit-piece here  that attacks AngloPyramidologist and other users. The hit-piece Abd has created contains libellous information, accusing users of ‘illegal practices’, he also accuses a Wikipedia user of ‘impersonation’ but has no technical evidence to prove that allegation, yet he presents his opinions as factual. The page is being used as a hit-piece as Abd has had a personal war with this the Wikipedia user. He also claims dangerous things that he knows the real life identities of Wikipedia editors. Abd was warned on Wikiversity for doxing several Wikipedia users .. This is not acceptable ‘study’. It is harassment and slander fuelled by Abd’s hatred. Can you delete it? Wikimedia should not be holding misinformation or personal grudges. From a tower (talk) 00:31, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Claiming that someone “has no technical evidence” when what the person has claimed is known to be true, he had impersonated, and the steward technical evidence was already filed and known, and he knew that. However, someone looking at that page (later deleted with my consent) could think it was imagined, and a vendetta. Mikeu from Wikiversity clearly thought so. Mikeu based his later actions on “private communications.” And that is how these trolls work. They lie to people they know might believe them.
This, by the way, was not Oliver D. Smith, i.e., not Anglo Pyramidologist, but the twin brother, mentioned early in the AP SPI archive. The warning mentioned was this. It referred to this request by Antifa activist, another SPA globally locked from this affair (thus steward-confirmed as the same LTA), containing numerous false statements, such as an attack on Manul, which did not exist. The page was almost totally lists of accounts with contributions links, taken from checkuser requests. However, as I was researching this, I came across a web page, and linked to it, and did not notice that the URL contained a name. oliver-smith-dark-entanglement/
So the admin deleted it. I was provided a copy — they certainly did not consider me a troll! — and removed that one link, and put the page up again, and that was accepted. I did not “out” the AP socks by name until much later, when it became obvious that this was already all over the internet, and as I found more evidence of illegal activity and definitely impersonation socking to defame, which they did with me, also.
That web site was incorrect, Rome Viharo had confused the two brothers. It is quite understandable. (And there remains a possibility that Oliver was both brothers and lied about the twin, as he claimed in an email to me. I consider that very unlikely. There are distinct patterns of behavior, as, in fact, partially described by Darryl in what is above. The interest in pseudoscience and debunking of psychics, etc., is Darryl, and the interest in alleged (or real) neo-Nazis and racists is Oliver. Darryl is currently focusing on what he believes is “medical or diet woo,” while Oliver is still obsessed with alleged racists, especially Michael Coombs and Emil Kirkegaard, and it is Kirkegaard who is suing Oliver for defamation.