Oliver on Wikipediocracy

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.

About Lomax v. WMF

In another post, Oliver wrote this:

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:

  1. 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!
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. However, Oliver sent another email, a complaint to the WMF, later, and he bragged about getting a response on RatWiki. In spite of what he wrote above, that is evidenced. Was this “wrong”? What did he write? I don’t know, but from context and from the agenda of his brother, with which he was cooperating, I assume it was false allegation (because I was not violating the WMF Terms of Use, nor was I creating any harassment of legitimate users.) Documenting Long Term Abusers, which AP accounts well qualify for, is normal for WMF editors.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.


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: paul_davies22@mail.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.

Your father’s block logs:

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Abd (banned)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/abd (banned)

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/abd (banned)

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

(Sent via [redacted])


The story



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.)

The user mentioned, Oliver D. Smith, was obviously a complainant, though I had not violated the WMF Terms of Use, certainly not  with him. He and his brother are known on Wikipedia as “Anglo Pyramidologist,” and I identified the original impersonator as one of those brothers. But I did not, at that point, name him or the brother. Oliver was the original “Anglo Pyramidologist,” which allowed the brothers to claim I was falsely accusing Oliver.

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.

Oliver Discord fiasco

Oliver D. Smith is openly Tobias, and posted this on User talk:EK

Cease and desist


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)

@Tobias get urself onto this discordEK (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

And you think Abd is bad. :/ — NekoDysk 15:13, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

So, first of all, what was on Wikipediocracy? I do not scan the internet ceaselessly looking for dirt. But I do check Tobias’ contributions! So I looked. My, my. Lomax v. WikiMedia Foundation, Inc. et al — page 3

Rome Viharo commented there, and so did Emblyn, i.e., EK.  I annotated the page. (and the page before)

Emblyn merely provided links to allow people to research what Rome had put up. However, then:

Darryl Smith tho, has been spamming r/WikiInAction using many accounts while saying Abd and Mikemikev did it

https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … inc_et_al/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … wikimedia/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … a/ekz9m2o/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … awsuit_on/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … cked_from/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … ng_emails/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … erm_abuse/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … l_article/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … ming_this/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … _spamming/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … dia_after/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … klyver_is/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … wikipedia/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … mikemikev/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/c … s_working/

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”.
—Tobias, don’t be fooled by Emil Kirkegaard‘s lies about my edits
      • Note #1: I don’t post on Reddit. Numerous accounts by trolls though are impersonating me.
      • Note #2: Despite the conspiracy theories and misinformation you can read on Coldfusioncommunity – I don’t have a brother who has edited this wiki.

He’s insane or blatantly lying or both. He did not actually link to this blog but to the article on me, which has a link to the wiki, not to the blog.

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.

And then:

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.

And then, again, later to Rome Viharo:

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

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. : }

Emblyn 05/16/2019 at 15:53

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)

EK (Emblyn) does have the Discord account on her RatWiki User page.

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

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. . . .

Oliver and the Wikiversity affair

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)

The Pump Random person 99 (discuss • contribs) 17:07, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

And then on meta:

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.”

Englisc. WMF Global account. Locked.

Wikiversity contributions:

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.

Dave Braunschweig. Oliver (Englisc) lies about the situation.

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).

On meta, Englisc:

Abd is posting nonsense; he was warned by an admin on Wikiversity to stop. He’s now tagging random users who have no relation to each other; I don’t own any other users listed above. The reason a couple of users showed up on his talk-page recently was because he started doxing people while spreading misinformation about their online activities; this also involved Abd’s friend MichaeldSuarez who was blocked yesterday for doxing on Abd’s talk page.Englisc (talk) 11:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

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 ”

In a later checkuser request, filed after Oliver had written the above, I added Za Frumi.

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:

Hello Oliver,

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.

RWW list of Mikemikev socks

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).

      1. 1488.
      2. 20,000 impersonation sock, impersonating [this IP] which was me, blocked by DS.
      3. Abd Pyramidologist impersonation DS trollsock — quotes me
      4. Adam Perkins likely article subject not Mikemikev
      5. All dogs go to heaven, all white girls go to hell. trollsock no evidence Mikemikev
      6. Andrew B. Chung dirty old bloke from China trollsock DS pattern
      7. Anti psychic. acknowledged DS
      8. Anti racist activist. identity not clear. Not Mikemikev
      9. Anti racist man probable DS
      10. Anti-racist skinhead probable DS
      11. Antifa activist probable DS
      12. Antifa Ireland possible Darryl
      13. Antifa Oliver Smith no edits. Possible Mikemikev, but could be impersonation
      14. ANTIFAGuy agenda OS, signal
      15. AntifaScientist looks like this could be Mike, blocked by Krom
      16. Antifascist probable OS
      17. Anti-Fascist for life DS
      18. AntiRacist possible trollsock. Not clearly Mike
      19. Apparition DS
      20. Apso2 OS
      21. Arcticos
      22. Asian dude. OS agenda, possible Darryl
      23. Asshole1. Vandal, no evidence Mike
      24. Aza unclear. Not Mike
      25. Ben Steigmann not Mike, possibly the real Ben Steigmann
      26. Ben Steigmann Blissentia trollsock, probably Darryl
      27. Bertha_Hues likely OS
      28. Billy the kid likely DS
      29. Blurp likely Darryl
      30. BNP Member. Trollsock prob. Mikemikev
      31. Cats1993. unclear
      32. CharlieBass. looks like OS but I’m not certain.
      33. Cheeese. Very probably OS, but only one edit.
      34. Communist Scientist troll. Could be Mike.
      35. Connor evans 50 cent possible OS, but too little data.
      36. Cosmos probably Darryl. Not Mike.
      37. Creationistsareloons not Mike. Identity unclear.
      38. Dan Grimy. From argument, OS
      39. DangerZone DS [talks about identity]
      40. Dave MacIntosh Mikemikev very likely
      41. DaveJefferson. Mikemikev likely
      42. Davide Piffer is a Neo-Nazi DS type trollsock
      43. Debunker DS
      44. Debunkingghosts [corrected]  probably DS
      45. Defending Ben Steigmann unclear possibly DS impersonation sock
      46. DougWellerisalunatic trollsock claims to be DS  fake outings
      47. Dr. Witt.
      48. DuceMoosolini antifa no edits. DS type troll name
      49. E.O.W.K. impersonation pattern is DS
      50. E. O. W Kirkegaard impersonation pattern is DS
      51. Ecologist DS
      52. EgalitarianJay. OS started Coombs article
      53. Eleonora Goldmann could be the article subject, no reason to claim Mikemikev
      54. Emil Kirkegaard impersonation socks designed to ban Kirkegaard
      55. Emil Kirkegaard 2.
      56. Emil Kirkegaard 55.
      57. Emil Kirkegaard Real.
      58. Emil OW Kirkegaard.
      59. EmilOWK2
      60. EmilOWKirkegaard1488. this would look like Mike except that’s how impersonation socks work.
      61. Englisc DS
      62. Erhul. Not every anti-Jewish editor is Mikemikev
      63. Evanand DS
      64. Faulty Logic unlikely to be Mike.
      65. FrankDickman. Likely Mike.
      66. FRIEND OF ROME VIHARO impersonation
      67. Fuerst more likely to be Fuerst himself
      68. 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]
      69. Funman2 [renamed user Will Viharo little dong] troll sock, but see what he removed.
      70. Funman3 [renamed user Jytdog 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
      71. Gelzer.
      72. Goblin Face Sciborg S Patel DS see Rome Viharo edit
      73. Goblin Face Sciborg Jon Donnis no account
      74. Golden likely OS
      75. Gust probably DS
      76. H4 not Mike
      77. Hdhdbhxgdvgddgvd. [renamed user I like vaggies] Troll, No indication Mike.
      78. Hettywainthrop DS
      79. Hexagon could be Mike
      80. Heyguy 2 impersonation sock, so I’m tagging it DS, but OS would have motivation
      81. Heyguy 3 impersonation sock
      82. Heyguy 4 impersonation sock
      83. Hope Not Hate member possible Oliver or Darryl. Not Mike
      84. Hu probably OS or DS, but it really could be anyone. Not Mike
      85. HumanPhenotypes
      86. Oliver Smith schizoid
      87. Iantresman
      88. Igobymanynames.
      89. it takes two 2 tango
      90. Janosz
      91. John 82.
      92. John chuck Fuerst
      93. John Fuerst
      94. JohnFuerstwithhispantsdown
      95. JohnnyFrostbite.
      96. Jon Donnis Goblin Face
      97. Jon Donniz
      98. JonDonisDUNKER.
      99. JonDonnisator
      100. KateGombert
      101. Kevin.
      102. KikeDestroyer
      103. Kirkegaard
      104. Krom loser
      105. Kroms
      106. Kromscape
      107. Litoes
      108. Losts
      109. Lysdexia
      110. M87
      111. Matt58
      112. Maunus
      113. Max Triggers.
      114. Michael A. Woodley
      115. Michael C.
      116. Michael Coombs.
      117. Michael Coombs Heyguy.
      118. Mike Brown Got What He Deserved.
      119. Mikemikev. apparently actual Mikemikev account.
      120. Mikemikev is cool
      121. Mikemikev1.
      122. Moxie14
      123. Mr Keyes.
      124. Mrs Blintz
      125. MrSheen
      126. Murgatroid
      127. MusikAnimal.
      128. Muslim man
      129. NateSpidgewood
      130. Neonazi10287.
      131. Nick Lowles Fan
      132. Nitro Man
      133. OC68 Stevenson Mu
      134. OdiniA
      135. OldWatch.
      136. Oliver Antifa troll/parody sock
      137. Oliver Atlantid Smith troll/parody sock, no edits
      138. Oliver boglins troll/parody sock
      139. Oliver D Smith troll/parody sock – distinct from RWW account
      140. Oliver Keyes
      141. Oliver_Schizo_Antifa. troll sock, impersonation of Kirkegaard? or him?
      142. Onacompass
      143. Philosophyfellow
      144. PhilPhilpot.
      145. Pringles
      146. Proud Muslim
      147. PS2
      148. RaceRealist88
      149. RaiderFan
      150. Rationaldriver.
      151. RationalP2
      152. Rationalwikilurker.
      153. Real David Piffer
      154. Redpenofdoom [corrected] troll. Pretends working for Viharo. Outs OS/DS accounts confused. Possible impersonation. Suspect DS. Mike not impossible.
      155. Richard Chepstow. Mike.
      156. Robert Defro.
      157. Rome viharo in a g string
      158. Rome_Viharo_Krom_heyguy
      159. Rupert Kirby.
      160. RV
      161. Sam Rainbow.
      162. Samiamsam
      163. Saxton Oliver or Darryl see page with evidence: Saxton
      164. Schizophreniac
      165. Schizophrenic
      166. Scientist
      167. Scythes.
      168. Shmuel.
      169. Skeptic_boy
      170. Skinhead_1488.
      171. Social Justice Internet Scientist
      172. Social Justice Warrior
      173. StarWarsNerd
      174. Stranger
      175. Symonyx
      176. The Emil Kirkegaard.
      177. TheJonDonnis
      178. Thorwold C Franke 2
      179. Topseudoscience.
      180. Torch
      181. Tuna
      182. UltraSleuth
      183. Upplysning
      184. Viharo Krom
      185. Vimpto. (Probable)
      186. Wangmeister.
      187. WeAreEqual
      188. Welliver
      189. Welsh people are cool.
      190. Zeros2


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 [1] and [2]). 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: [3] [4][5]). 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. [6]. 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.


    Basically any crazy or irrational belief Wyatt will support. He believes in ancient aliens, ghosts, the illuminati and denies the Holocaust. His edits on Rightpedia and Stormfront also shows he believes in plenty of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.

    Buffoonery and racism

    Wyatt is a racist in the style of trolls from 4chan and Daily Stormer. He posts crude racismattacks on Jews, and posts general idiocy, including alt-right memes on Stormfront. He is also scientifically illiterate having posted incorrect information about genetics.


    He was caught impersonating another user named Blu Aardvark in 2015. He has also impersonated RaiderFan and other users on RationalWiki, a site he trolls and vandalises.

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Rightpedia RaiderFan is Merkel. Look at the timeline: “RaiderFan claims Brian Ruhe is Jewish] (06:50, 29 January 2017). DiamondDisc1 blocks RaiderFan (07:18, 29 January 2017). Merkel picks up where RaiderFan left off (01:14, 30 January 2017).Also, RaiderFan’s userpage fits Wyatt’s profile. The userpage mentions glyphosate, and Wyatt spent considerable time editing Metapedia’s and Rightpedia’s Monsanto article: JuniusThaddeus (talk) 12:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

    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 review of Mikemikev list of OS socks on RWW

    Copied from archive of RationalWikiWiki page created by “Oliver D Smith” known to be the real Oliver D. Smith. Probable deceptions are in pink.

    Oliver D. Smith sockpuppets

    Oliver D. Smith sockpuppets is a conspiracy-theory-esque article about RationalWiki filled with misinformation, written by the troll Mikemikev on the wiki Rightpedia.[1] 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 sockpuppets and 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

    Account list

    † = Smith. ₪ = Not Smith.

    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.[2] 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,[3] 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.[4]
    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[5]) 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 clearly wasn’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.

    Notes & References

    1.  http://en.rightpedia.info/w/Oliver_D._Smith_sockpuppets [edited link to point to changed name of page]
    2.  See user page.
    3.  List of Mikemikev (banned) socks
    4.  Raider Fan, see also the information about the impersonation on Wrongpedia.
    5.  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.

    Blaming it all on Mikemikev


    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.[1]

    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)

    Octo was Oliver, active from 14 August 2018 to 20:53, 4 October 2018.

    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.

    I’m still working on this.

    RWW list of Mikemikev socks


    RationalWiki Smith brothers conspiracy theory

    This article was posted to RationalWiki by MrOrganic.

    It was presented for deletion here:


    The article was suppressed a year and a half after being deleted.

    10:34, 22 April 2019 D (talk | contribs) secretly changed visibility of 16 revisions on page RationalWiki Smith brothers conspiracy theory: content hidden, edit summary hidden, username hidden and applied restrictions to sysops (Personal or potentially identifying information)

    I have recovered it , so the content is below as it was last archived.

    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.

    Evidence for the conspiracy theory is non-existent and was started on Encyclopædia Dramatica, arguably as satire. Nevertheless, an assortment of cranksfundiesand pseudoscientists upset at RationalWiki for creating articles about them, now promote the conspiracy theory to vent their anger at a scapegoat, who can be potentially doxed. This article will not provide any alleged dox, only referring to the surname “Smith” (which is very commonw).



    Proponents of the Smith brothers conspiracy theory include: Rome ViharoAlex TsakirisCraig WeilerLaird Shaw (all from the woo-forums Skeptiko or Pscience Quest), John FuerstEmil O. W. Kirkegaard and Abd ul-Rahman Lomax.


    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 paranormalistscreationistspsychic-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 (noteRationalWiki 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.[1] 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.]

    1. Wikipedia We Have a Problem

    but this page was a bit earlier than what shows there, and is more on point:

    The Smiths’ Dark Entanglement, a criminal report.

    Commentary  (by Abd, May 10, 2019)

    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.[36] 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.[37]

    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.

    He was lying. “A group of RationalWiki editors.” No. One, using the account Marky (Darryl) which was created for that purpose. That there were two brothers sometimes at the same house was known from way back, on Wikipedia. However, the other brother did edit the article. What I recognize now as Oliver socks which later edited my article are Asgardian (now blocked by D as Oliver, and see his comment about himself) , Skeptical, probably Jog, Dr._Witt (see his last edit), SkepticDave, Vimpto, Pringles, EvilGremlin, Arcticos, Jean, and Tobias.

    Darryl would be AstroPhysics, Anti-Fascist_for_life, various troll and impersonation socks, probably Anti_racist_man, and definitely Debunking_spiritualism.

    (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.

    Evidence for the conspiracy theory is non-existent and was started on Encyclopædia Dramatica, arguably as satire.

    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.

    a household of brothers who have created most the RationalWiki articles on paranormalistscreationistspsychic-believers and other pseudoscientists

    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?


    Subpage of anglo-pyramidologist/the-threat/

    This is not what began the AP affair, but what moved it to a new level and stage. A trollsock, From a tower, left this message on my meta talk page:

    No further engagement

    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.

    Just before this edit to my talk page, Darryl wrote on a steward’s talk page:

    Abd stalking wikipedia users

    Abd has created a hit-piece here [6] 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 [7].. 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.


    The threat

    This is not what began the AP affair, but what moved it to a new level and stage. A trollsock, From a tower, left this message on my meta talk page:

    (This troll was conclusively identified and locked by a steward as a Long Term Abuser, the same LTA as had impersonated a Wikipedia user and attacked him on Wikiversity, and who created many troll socks as part of this affair. This has all been shown elsewhere. This was not an impersonator. What he wrote was likely true from his point of view.) I have bolded the threat, that he carried out. I have backgrounded what is likely true in green.

    (See detailed analysis on the subpage which contains the content below, other than the colors.)

    No further engagement

    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.

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

    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.

    I would like to add though that AngloPyramidologist is innocent.

    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.

    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.

    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.

    I was even offered paid work from the owner of a skeptic group.

    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)

    Just before this edit to my talk page, this user wrote on a steward’s talk page:

    I have put lies or deceptions in red.

    Abd stalking wikipedia users

    Abd has created a hit-piece here [6] 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 [7].. 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)

    (The study was moved to meta and considered acceptable by stewards as an LTA study, against attempts to have it deleted. However, I did consent to deletion later, to reduce disruption, and moved it all off-wiki. Then I was globally office-banned, which is always based on private communications.)


    Registered 10:46, 12 April 2019, Tobias is the currently active Oliver Smith account on RationalWiki. Many prior accounts were blocked, before or after Tobias started up.

    User page was deleted but was archived. Obviously sarcastic, but intended to reinforce later claims that other admissions were also sarcastic. Hypothes.is Annotation of page. See admission of trolling.

    Let’s go back and look at Oliver accounts. Aeschylus created quite a splash.

    (See Oliver desperate). Oliver requested that pages he had created be deleted. He’s being sued. But instead of simply admitting that, as the original author, he had been creating articles out of a vendetta against Emil Kirkegaard — and nearly everyone associated with Kirkegaard), he simply requested deletion because he was in legal trouble. In other words, a doomed request, because Rats would dig in their heels, not realizing the extent to which Oliver had warped RatWiki for his purposes.) Aeschylus was blocked.

    Roberts was a Smith brother, probably Oliver. Blocked as probably Mikemikev. Obviously not.

    Edward Dutton was created by Octo (Oliver). [blocked 22:01, 21 April 2019 as Aeschylus]. Edits by:

    • 6857 (probable Oliver) [blocked 15:02, 9 April 2019 as sock, having attacked a Mikemikev sock]
    • SimonandSimon [blocked 21:13, 17 April 2019 for “ban evasion, Smith]
    • Tobias

    Tobias created:


    Venom commented on Talk: Nathan Cofnas with Smith agenda links, but probably is not Oliver. Blocked for ban evasion. But ban of whom?

    Greenrd argued with Tobias on the Talk page and there was revert warring by Tobias.

    21:33, 25 April 2019‎ Tobias edited the Coop. The edits were hidden. They attacked Greenrd, outing him; his immediate offense? Arguing with Tobias on Nathan Cofnas . This is what the Smiths do. If any editor argues with them, they scour the internet for information about the user and present it in the worst possible light, and Oliver, schizophrenic, will imagine much worse than most of us, and may, in fact, fully believe what he imagines is fact.

    The filing was redacted and moved to Talk:Nathan Cofnas. On that page, Tobias continued with standard Oliver behavior, crowing about Noah Carl being dismissed from Oxford, as part of a flap that Oliver created. Yes, “mainstream journalists agreed” but, in fact, what I’ve seen was effectively quotation of RatWiki, including highly inflammatory claims that Oliver is being sued over. Some “mainstream journalism” is sloppy and lazy.

    Oliver complains:

    Its funny that I’m often attacked across the internet for my activities as “lying” when everything I say on RationalWiki is accurate, well-sourced and backed up independently by other people, including mainstream journalists.Tobias (talk) 03:32, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

    Oliver has claimed schizophrenia, which could indicate that he will “see” inferences from evidence that are far from likely. If someone else glances at that evidence, without looking at context, etc., they may well “see” the same. If so, then, Oliver is not “lying” when he claims these things, he believes them. Oliver has written things that a reasonable person would know were false, such as what I cover on WikipediaSucks on Oliver Smith.

    Colloquially, he “lied.” But he is not a reasonable person, and he shows no signs of changing his behavior, he is immediately suspicious and acts on suspicions that are far from clear. It can be predicted that he will continue to disrupt RatWiki . . . even if this account is blocked. He has been blocked many times on many sites, and just creates more socks. I have yet to enumerate all I have found.

    Tobias says that once Greenrd is banned, he can write an article on him. Again, that is what they have been doing for years. Why should he stop now?

    Desysop & ban, then I can create an article on Mr. Green. He’s very similar to Nathan Cofnas. Do we really want hereditarians/racialists as editors, let alone sysops? From what I’ve already found about Green (since he uses the same username across internet), he’s an absolute nutjob. You can find him posting about his support for eugenics on Reddit and he’s in the same HBDcircle as people like Cofnas, Noah CarlHbdchick etc. Tobias (talk) 13:21, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

    And Tobias is not a nutjob? This page — from a very right-wing publication, anonymous author, but a legally responsible organization (VDARE, unlike RatWiki) — covers Oliver.

    Clear difference: Green is open about his identity. Tobias is now so thoroughly outed that he can’t pretend with an account like Tobias, but it is still difficult to research hundreds of accounts!

    (And when one does, of course, and reports it, the Smiths claim “impersonation.” Lies! Even though impersonation is preposterous, in most cases that matter.)

    See the Reddit discussion of that VDARE article. It was bombarded with trollsocks, over a hundred comments, most repeating the same thing over and over. This is Smith behavior, attempting to bury anything critical of them with noise and also with lies and deceptions repeated under many different names, that’s classical sock puppetry. (There were many other trollsocks created at this time, commenting on threads that other trollsocks had created about me, about Dysklyver, about Mikemikev. They blame it on me or on Mikemikev, as they have blamed many others in the past.

    (As we will see, Oliver claims that I accused him of being the master behind all those Reddit socks. I haven’t, that was simply another false statement from him, not supported by the actual statements. He does that all the time, so people often say that he lies — and I sometimes do this as well. But he’s insane, and may well believe what is completely preposterous. The insane put it all together differently than clearer thinkers do.)

    More classic Oliver antics as Tobias:

    • Attacks Glamour Sickle. GS was blocked as Mikemikev, but the evidence for that was that he pointed to a screenshot hosted on EmilKirkegaard’s blog that was a mail from Oliver Smith’s attorney. Since Oliver was attacking GS for . . . for what? . . . GS pointing to that could simply indicate that he realized who was attacking him and found that document.

    It was stupid — or ignorant — to post it if he cared about the account, whomever he was. But with no privileges, easier to just create another account if he is silly enough to want to waste more time on RatWiki.

    The flap began over this edit. I can see why Oliver would object, it was overstated, and Oliver is obsessed about this issue, but the position was not at all what I would expect from Mikemikev. This is not a racist position, almost the opposite. Tobias attacked GS as Mikemikev, which is behavior that got him blocked before. Here.

    The screenshot is present in the archived version of Kirkegaard’s blog page on Oliver, timestamped April 19, 2019. So GS could easily have seen that. This has happened again and again on RatWiki. New user writes something that sets Oliver off, who makes personal accusations. So the person figures out who Oliver is and says so. Off with their head! Or this actually was Mikemikev playing a more patient game than before, creating RW content that can actually be accepted by Rats. Oliver wants it deleted, not because it’s wrong, but because it was allegedly written by Mikemikev. Very old story.

      • Block of CBH by Tobias. CBH was anti-hereditarian, and I suspected him of being Oliver. But it could be Darryl or someone else. This discussion on Talk:Eric Turkheimer shows standard Oliver behavior.
        • Jsolinsky worked on the article as a Turkeimer supporter, perhaps, and was harassed and cooped, driven away. Standard RatWiki.
        • Concerned was obviously Oliver Smith, blocked for ban evasion 23 March 2019.
        • CBH defended his article, he was attacked by Concerned as a troll.  So pattern: Oliver disagrees with someone on the fine points of “hereditarianism,” and so Oliver accuses him of being The Enemy, and blocks him or accuses him of Bad Behavior and gets someone else to block him. It’s been going on for a long time. Tobias claims that CBH was a sock of Jean Lusaz. And see here, by Concerned on CBH.
        • Jean_Lusaz is called a “problem editor.” Never blocked, no rights changes. Lusaz created pages:

    So Tobias was deceptive to claim Lusaz was “cooped.” He tried and failed. (But a schizophrenic may remember an event like that differently from a normal person. That he filed it made it real.)

    Lusaz and CBH created three attack pages similarly to Oliver. I am not claiming they are the same, not at all. But Oliver could see him/them as competitors in writing pages on alleged racists and racialist pseudoscientists. There is no evidence shown that Lusaz and CBH were the same user. Neither one was particularly disruptive, they were not blocked (except CBH by Oliver, months later, unblocked by Dysklyver). Oliver was blocked for his behavior, which he is repeating, as well as for his own good (i.e., with his legal and health problems, he would be better off not stirring the pot so intensely), not creating more attack articles on RatWiki.

    Tobias was given a “probation.” How far does he need to go? I’ve annotated that talk page discussion.

    Update May 8, 2019

    And this goes on and on.

    Tobias commented on the Reddit mess. I have annotated this with Hypothes.is, to put those comments on Reddit without creating tomes, but here is that discussion as well, from Talk:Emil Kirkegaard, the last place he should be touching, given his legal issues.

    Impersonations on Reddit

    It’s the same pattern with dumb and dumber. Mikemikev creates an account attacking Emil Kirkegaard, then Abd ul-Rahman Lomax shows up claiming it is me. I don’t post on Reddit and none of these accounts are mine. I just blocked several accounts of Mike today here linking to Reddit.

    It is implausible that Mikemikev would be attacking Kirkegaard, even if they may have disagreements. Mikemikev can contact Kirkegaard directly if he has the question that was raised in the thread. I did not claim that the account was Oliver. Oliver does not read carefully, because he is simply looking for what is “wrong,” to attack. I don’t know if it was him, but the many accounts created repeat the Smith party line.

    It could be either brother, or, less likely, someone else who supports them. Mikemikev is implausible because the throwaway accounts would be counter to his agenda. The “created to impersonate Oliver” is quite a funny argument. I.e., create an account that makes a series of dumb claims, repeated over and over, that are Oliver’s claims, it would be an impersonation. Yes, it would. But nobody is going to block Oliver anywhere because of those socks. Real impersonation socks are created to attrract those kinds of responses from clueless communities.

    Many Mikemikev accounts on RatWiki are completely obvious as him, but we should be aware that there have been impersonations for a long time. Dysklyver has received emails that were from Mikemikev, and Mikemikev could deny that from known accounts.

    This lack of timely denial — when an impersonation is visible, and from an account known to be the target, such as from a known Oliver email — is evidence against impersonation. The Reddit accounts are not impersonating Mikemikev, but are doing a great job impersonating a Smith brother, pointing to articles created by the Smiths.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiInAction/comments/blegca/why_was_emil_kirkegaard_user_deleet_blocked_from/ Tobias (talk) 20:38, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

    Mikemikev’s and Abd increased trolling activity is because they know there is an impending lawsuit involving Kirkegaaard;

    Schizophrenics routinely believe that they can read the minds of others, that they know incentives. This one is preposterous: the activity that Oliver is calling trolling was not from me, nor from Mikemikev. Mikemikev may well have posted links to the Reddit discussions on RatWiki. Believe me, I’ve been tempted to do that! But I have not. (It is impossible to stop such comments, but socking is not my MO, unlike what the Smiths have claimed. I *have* created RatWiki accounts, and have edited IP there, but it has been far more rare than they claim, and for arguably legitimate purposes; for example, I used an account to ask a Rat if a comment elsewhere, using his name, was him. It was not. Of course, that account was also blocked. Anyone frustrating the Smith agenda in any way will be blocked if they think they can get away with it.

    They are fascists, suppressing free discussion. And that’s been consistent for years. They will object to “fascist” thinking that it means “neo-Nazi” or “antisemitic” or something. That is not the original meaning of the term, it is about the suppression of freedom in the name of collective “rightness,” and it can be left-wing or right-wing or even “anti-fascist.”

    Fasicists are enemies of academic freedom, which must include the freedom to be wrong. There are limits, to be sure. But a free society permits much and only acts as minimally necessary to contain damage from deceptive ideas. There is always a tension, but the Smiths come down firmly on the side of suppressing whatever they believe is wrong, and in many areas: parapsychology, cold fusion, medical and diet “woo,” including skepticism directed at authoritarian positions, which they will call “denialism.”

    Thus they are not genuine skeptics.

    I’m guessing Mikemikev is trying to cause me legal trouble hence why he’s trying to blame his Reddit attacks on Kirkegaard onto me,

    The Reddit socking does not cause Oliver any legal trouble. He is ignorant. The only way they could cause him trouble is if it could be shown in court that they were him. That is not impossible, but unlikely unless they were him. I would encourage him to realize that, if he is deposed or appears at trial, that lying under oath is truly stupid, very risky, he could go to jail for it, whereas in a civil suit, he only risks damages, and he claims he is judgment-proof.

    So Oliver is imagining and asserting (for whose benefit?) what is quite implausible, unless Mikemikev is really stupid. The Rats do imagine that all alleged “racists” are stupid, so they sometimes believe arguments like this. I have not had any political discussions with Mikemikev, but I’ve not yet found him to lie, and when I pointed that out, he suggested that maybe I should consider his political positions in that light, at least that is how I interpreted it. But people can hold and express quite bizarre political positions and not be, therefore, liars. We need political discussion between people of highly divergent views, but who are not willing to lie, because it becomes impossible to find peace and justice if people lie.

    Lies are the enemy of humanity, a truly ancient enemy.

    and all his socking here today related to spamming Reddit, which is quite pointless since I’ve already shown my lawyer all of Mikemikev’s impersonations

    There was socking, indeed, pointing to Reddit, for two reasons: there was an article published in VDARE, a right-wing publication, well-funded, “responsible.” Which means that if they defame you, you could sue their ass off, and recovery is possible. The article was on the wikis (Wikipedia and RatWiki) and Oliver D. Smith. And it thoroughly outed him, far more deeply than I have ever seen before, giving an aerial photo of exactly where his parents live — information I did not have before. (The Smiths have claimed for a year and a half that I “publish the addresses of skeptics” — meaning themselves — when what I actually did was have a street (not the house location) from a document that had been published in various places, with the names of the residents. I redacted that within a day, even though it was harmless. This is how they create defamation, they find something that can be stated that “looks bad” when taken out of context, and then repeat it in dozens of places. Or more.

    That he has shown his lawyer alleged impersonations (again, are those impersonations — they do not claim to be Oliver Smith) is meaningless. But schizophrenics create meaning, routinely, it is in the nature of the disorder. He is being sued by Kirkegaard and possibly others. What would Mikemikev’s behavior have to do with this, that his lawyer would be interested? What, “Look how mean they are to me!”

    His poor lawyer! The communication from the lawyer, trolled onto RatWiki.

    To find the latest scoop on Oliver, I look at logs for his account and see whom he has blocked, then look at their contributions. Oliver has never learned that by reacting to trolling, you can call attention to it. Dysklyver has recently attempted to explain this to him. Deaf ears.

    So Oliver (Tobias) blocked Smashism. (Ban evasion: mikemikev) Smashism Contributions are Juicy.

    Oliver (as SimonandSimon) created Lance Welton, the pseudonym of the author of the VDARE article on him, after that article had been published (April 6, 2019). This, again, is standard Smith behavior: create articles attacking anyone who exposes what they do. Okay, so maybe this was missional for RatWiki in this case, but did the article mention that piece, which was extensively about RatWiki including in the title?

    No. So Smashism contributions:

    From the RatWiki meeting page, the Saloon Bar:

    Hey Guys

    Have you seen this article about you in VDare? Smashism (talk) 07:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

    From the article on Lance Welton:

    Welton has also written a hit-piece on Rationalwiki editor Oliver D. Smith.[23]

    23. Lunatics Take Over Asylum: Oliver D. Smith, RationalWiki, And The Wikipedeans

    When I was still a sysop on RatWiki, I made a small harmless change to the article created on me by Oliver’s brother. I was yelled at for COI editing. So, here, Oliver has an obvious COI, and he uses his tools to support it, instead of letting others handle it. That’s not only bad for his own state of mind, but it is also a demonstration of how RatWiki has bent over backwards over the years to accommodate the Smiths.

    He reverted the edit without explanation, and semi-protected the article “prevent more mikemikev socks”. He blocked Smashism, of course, Ban evasion: mikemikev). He trolltopped the “hey guys” Saloon bar comment, but then, this is the first Dysklyver action I have seen that I’d question. He deleted it. It is very normal for RatWiki to cover articles written about it, even “crappy” articles.” they have have a whole “Pissed at us” page. So why not this? Both Smashism additions were true and verifiable. But there are Forbidden Topics on RatWiki, and anything Smith brothers is Untouchable. Except some recent approaches.

    As long as RatWiki suppresses inconvenient information, there will be continued disruption, and the methods used to suppress make that much more likely. Insulting trolls encourages them, always.

    Smashism may have been Mikemikev, it’s plausible. But this is by no means clear. It could have been anyone who saw that and thought it relevant. It is certainly relevant to the Lance Welton article! And Rats, I would think, would be interested in the fact that Oliver had an obvious axe to grind.

    Back to what Oliver wrote about Mikemikev.


    (he seems to have recently also been trolling Kirkegaard on 4chan), furthermore I’ve also made a disclaimer pointing out I don’t post on Reddit. Let me also respond to some of Abd’s lies:

    Oliver can make any number of disclaimers, it is not proof, because he is a known and admitted liar. That does not mean he is lying on this, but I did not accuse him of posting on Reddit. I pointed out that the pile of throwaway accounts were pursuing a Smith agenda. Easily, it could have been his brother. As to 4chan, the trolling of Kirkegaard (no reference was given) could easily be from the same source as the Reddit sock farm, and Oliver sees Mikemikev underneath every bed and noise in the night. Again, schizophrenia, not a fun disorder, unless one learns to be careful and rigorously and thoroughly honest. In which case it can be a blast!

    Oliver is following 4chan? Someone take his computer access away, he doesn’t need that mind-rot.

    • Abd falsely claims I contacted the media (who?) about Kirkegaard. I never did and he presents no evidence for this outright lie.

    From the hypothes.is annotation for an archive.is copy of this page: “The media contact claim came from Skeptic Dave, referring to the author of two articles that Oliver has admitted writing. Skeptic Dave was Oliver (Aeschylus), see the block log.

    This is conclusive. It is possible that Oliver does not remember all that he has done. But if he has any sense, he will look at evidence indicating his memory is defective. It could be the first step toward recovering from his disorders. Rational skepticism does not forget to be skeptical of ourselves and our memories. I learned this years ago, by recording and creating transcripts of meetings I had attended. Most people would think that a waste of time, obsessive. But I learned from it that my memories of what happened and what actually happened were different. In later training all this became very clear. This is normal human psychology, but not understood by many.

    • Abd falsely claims I first added the RationalWiki section about Kirkegaard’s writings on paedophilia. Nope. Those were originally added by another editor  (in 2016 those claims were never on the article version I wrote), secondly I never knew about this blog post until Oliver Keyes (not me) posted about. So I never even dug this up.

    Again a memory problem? He is correct that the claims were not in the first version, he created. It is also possible that the information came from Oliver Keyes — I have no opinion on that, and it does not matter. Rather, the pedophilia claims were added by Schizophrenic., see my page covering that account.

    Schizophrenic admitted being Oliver, and if this was an impersonator, it was not handled until long after, once it had been externally noticed. But Schizophrenic was quite active, on topics of high Oliver interest, not just Emil Kirkegaard.

    If Oliver keeps up his historical behavior, faced with evidence, he will foam at the mouth, “Lies! You are defending a pedophile-apologist neo-Nazi racist! You have no proof!” And then he writes about others being nut cases, and ugly as well. (In that little flap, Oliver shows that he believes gratuitous insults are acceptable if the target has done something wrong, somehow, somewhere. This is all linkage that I would expect from the disorders he has claimed.)

    • Abd repeatedly claims without evidence I’ve “defamed” Kirkegaard. That’s for a judge or court to decide. My defence is truth or honest opinion.Tobias (talk) 21:04, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

    It is true that “defamation” is conclusory, not factual. However, Oliver writes conclusions as if fact, constantly. I could not testify in court that Oliver defamed Kirkegaard, because I would not be considered legally competent to come to that conclusion. But I could assert this in a complaint, as I’m sure Kirkegaard has. I can assert this in ordinary speech. Now, he asserts that I claim “without evidence,” yet this is simply his opinion, certainly not “truth.” I’ve presented evidence many times, but here it is again, one piece among many. His email to me. In it, he calls Emil Kirkegaard a “neo-Nazi pedophile.” My informed but not-expert option is that this was defamation, and this not marginal, and was not from a possible impersonator.

    If Oliver had not also made sure that this libel was widely published and cited and the meme continuing to be distributed, it would probably have come to nothing. But he did do those things.

    He is denying that he contacted media. Of course! Spreading that story to media was defamation, intended to harm.

    Honest opinion is not enough. If we are not careful with how we express our honest opinions, we easily can create harm to others, and we may be held legally responsible. If what we express is obviously mere opinion, such as “He is an idiot!” it may not be actionable. But if it has a possible factual basis, with serious consequences for the target, such as “So-and-so is a pedophile and I have proof,” then actual harm can be caused through even inadvertent error. We are responsible for the harm caused by our “inadvertent errors.” Such as traffic accidents.

    This is civil law, not criminal. In criminal law, there must be mens rea, “intention of wrong-doing”.

    Now, Oliver has said things like this many times, “Abd repeatedly claims without evidence …” yet one of the reasons I have a reputation for writing so much is that I present a great deal of evidence. So if his words have any meaning, and if he is not insane, he’s lying. There is evidence, plenty of it.

    Of course, he’s also insane, so he might or might not be lying. I’m not a mind-reader, unlike so many Rats who seem to know how “woo-believers” and other objects of their derision think.

    Update May 9, 2019

    Oliver (Tobias) responded, again on the totally inappropriate page, Talk:Emil Kirkegaard. They are ruminating about this kind of activity on the Moderator’s forum, though the Smiths have long been importing drama from other sites onto RatWiki.

    Lomax has responded to above, predictably writing more lies. Laughably his “evidence” for the first claim about me contacting the media is a troll account that made some tongue-in-cheek comments and jokes (which I’ve pointed out to him multiple times, but he continues to quote deliberately out of context for his own delusions); the same account also made plenty of non-serious claims such as “This is my 59809540990228822 account. Whew. I keep loosing track.” According to Lomax, that must then mean I have 59809540990228822 accounts. Apparently if you crack a joke on the internet or shit-post, it must all be true. Tobias (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

    Oliver almost never gives links to the actual claims he calls “lies.” Here, he calls SkepticDave a troll account and claims SkepticDave was joking. It did not look like a joke, and nobody laughed. Again, Oliver draws a conclusion and then attributes it to me, about an actual joke. The reality was that Skeptic Dave had many accounts, how many I have never counted.

    SkepticDave edited from 10 January 2018 to 4 February 2018, and was given autopatrolled. While SD focused on Oliver topics, mostly, his first edit was a possible Darryl topic (i.e., Oliver’s brother). I see accessory signs that, however, SD was indeed Oliver. The following is reasonably conclusive:

    SkepticDave created  .Anatoly_Karlin. This was later edited by Agent47M87, Arcticos, and Tobias, all Oliver socks. All but Tobias have been blocked as socks of Aeschylus (Oliver), who admitted creating the Karlin article.

    So Oliver is either insane or lying.

    He’s also still repeating his favourite conspiracy theory I have a brother who edits RationalWiki/Reddit who is somehow paid money by someone to edit here, despite those claims originated by trolls on Encyclopedia Dramatica.Tobias (talk) 21:44, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

    And this is an old story. First of all, the brother. Oliver has many times commented on his brother, or on his “family,” and has often complained that his “family” is being outed on pages that refer only to the two twin brothers. In his email to me of January-25-2018, Oliver wrote, about his brother:

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

    (Oliver saw no harm in impersonating a “ghost-believer” to get him blocked and his study of sources deleted.)

    The story of payment shows up also in the comment by Darryl to me on meta.

    I was even offered paid work from the owner of a skeptic group.

    I have never claimed that Darryl was actually paid, but that it is possible.

    In a conversation with his target, Darryl refers to the Guerilla Skeptics (who are almost certainly volunteers) but says he is involved much deeper than that, which could be a reference to being a paid editor.

    As well, Oliver wrote me, April 7, 2018, that there was no brother, and suggested I ask Rome Viharo for email he had sent to Viharo. I did, and Viharo supplied me with the mails, and this is from the mail of  that same day.

    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.

    There is no evidence of a sister, other than the Wikipedia account HealthyGirl, blocked as an AP sock (good hand account, by the way, caught up in checkuser). There are public records showing a brother the same age, Darryl. The behaviors are different. He was now lying about lying. Now, why bring up Farley? Well, Farley would be a possible connection with the James Randi Educational Foundation, which might have had funding for writing. Again, that’s speculation, but the point is that the paid editing suspicion is not without evidence. There are two organizations, and neither are “shadow,” Guerilla Skeptics (Susan Gerbic running it) and JREF.

    And somebody has clearly been protecting the Smiths on RationalWiki. What they have done would have gotten any ordinary user “promoted” and banned several times over.

    This had nothing to do with Encyclopedia Dramatica, but that has been a common Smith claim. Blame it all on ED and on Michaeldsuarez. Or blame it all on Michael Coombs or Abd. There have been other targets, such as GethN7, and Joshua Connor Moon and his mother.

    Yet if this was all a lie, how can others be at fault for believing it? Oliver arguments can be like this, internally self-contradictory. No brother, and “doxxing my family.”

    But if his brother were actually being paid, his brother might not be thrilled at how much Oliver revealed, that could be clearly shown to be him, and to protect family income, Oliver might well take on all the blame. After all, he has no job and is on public assistance, living with his parents, or so his lawyer wrote.

    Later, he wrote to Viharo:

    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 has never understood how I think. Since I’ve been very young, I hold multiple contradictory ideas in my mind, and I “believe” none of them. Rather, I explore possibilities. First of all, from what I’ve seen, Oliver was not Dan Skeptic, that was clearly Darryl.

    Should he be “criticized” for protecting a brother? Surely that depends on what the brother did! I explained to him, as others had explained to him, that he can become responsible for what his brother has done if he protects him from natural consequences, to the detriment of others. But when a conversation starts to become real, something breaks and he starts frothing at the mouth.

    There is very little hope for him with his disorders if he doesn’t make a choice of total honesty. He really can’t afford to screw around with it. As he is, his life expectancy is low, he is at high risk.

    Tobias continues to careen from one fracas to another, on RatWiki.

    May 10, 2019

    Jinx commented, as EverymorningWP, in the Reddit thread Why was Emil Kirkegaard user: Deleet blocked from Wikipedia? He also confirmed his identity as Jinx on RatWiki. Wow! A Rat who is open, this is refreshing! (There are a few, to be sure.)

    On User talk:Jinx.

    Reddit trolling

    The users on the Reddit thread are Mikemikev and Abd. Both of them are notorious for creating countless troll socks, including impersonating other users. @D was also apparently impersonated there and I now see either Mike or Abd has created a sock using my name.Tobias (talk) 22:46, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

    I mean I think I already had a good idea of that since it was pointed out in the thread. I don’t see “Tobias” anywhere there. I honestly don’t know that much about this whole Oliver Smith/abd situation. Jinx (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

    Tl;dr, Reddit is full of trolls. 🙂 — NekoDysk 09:27, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

    Okay, There is only one account in the thread that is at all likely to be Mikemikev, and that is OliverDSmithAntifa, which also explains Tobias’s (Oliver’s) comment about a sock “using his name.”

    I have never impersonated anyone. Not ever. An “impersonation sock” is one that pretends to be someone and, with that guise, acts badly or disruptively or offensively in order to throw mud on the target. Mikemikev has created many accounts using Oliver Smith or variations in them, but none of these (that I have seen so far) could have been mistaken for Oliver. Some claimed impersonations, my review indicates, were actually Oliver, such as, on RatWiki, Schizophrenic (obviously Oliver) and Schizophreniac (a little more difficult, but wrote a bio of Oliver that was utterly unlike any of the hostile bios, it was how he sees himself.) As to Schizophrenic, notice who blocked him, and then who blocked the blocking sysop and why.  (Aeschylus  — see above — was Oliver. In fact, Dysklyver erred there, I think, but if not, I’d be fascinated to learn why. DS was not Oliver, but his brother Darryl, and much stands on this intelligence.)

    I have also not seen any Mikemikev true impersonations, as distinct from parody accounts, like OliverDSmithAntifa. I am not certain that was Mikemikev, because lately the Smiths have been claiming there are many Mikemikev throwaway accounts on Reddit, for accounts I’m sure are them, and might have created that in order to strengthen the story. But as D (Nekodysk, Dysklyver) has pointed out, without a program, it is a tad difficult to distinguish between a crazy loon, and another crazy loon imitating a crazy loon. — But it can often be done, because crazies still have individual personalities, and there is the issue of what the police call “guilty knowledge.”

    But it is certainly possible to distinguish the real people, and Jinx (known open identity), Dysklyver (ditto) and myself, from anonymous trolls. Oliver D. Smith is also a real person and has sometimes been open about it. He claims he is not creating all those Reddit socks, and he might be telling the truth. It might be his brother, which he often does not mention as he blames everyone else. But some recent comments I think might have been difficult for even his brother to write.

    What is clear about all those socks is that they are singing the Smith opera, referring to Smith-written articles on RatWiki, repeating the standard Smith memes. By the duck test, on Wikipedia, these would have been whacked as Anglo Pyramidologist long ago. But the Wikipedians are slow, sometimes. This was Oliver, 99.9%. I see three strong signs.

    Could the flood of throwaway socks be impersonations of Oliver or his brother? While it is possible, it is quite unlikely, because those socks are pursuing the agenda of the Smiths, attacking their enemies. Most impersonation socks are quick, throwaway, because it’s a lot of work to actually play out, in detail, someone else’s agenda. There are many impersonation socks pretending to me that have edited RatWiki. They have been listed as me by the probable sock master — which was probably Darryl, not Oliver. They will often copy a piece of text I wrote and then spam it, irritating the Rats no end.

    Ah, the Smith brothers. Jinx, you have comments from three Oliver Smith socks on your Talk page.  PunisherOcto, Concerned. These were all identified by me as Oliver, well before Dysklyver acted on his own information, and, of course, the Smiths called it all “lies.”

    Meanwhile, those throwaway accounts. Oliver will focus on the parody account, as if it has something to do with the others. This is his long-term method of handling evidence. He will point to what supports his point, especially at what makes his enemies look bad, with abundant hostile interpretation, and suppress or distract from all the rest. He does it with all his targets, and it is how he writes articles. In that particular Reddit thread, these are the throwaways:

    (The year is all 2019, times are GMT-4)

    1. May 6 12:24 Waters4545 started the thread asking about Deleet (Kirkegaard). Mikemikev — or I — could ask Kirkegaard directly. No, this question was asked to provide a soapbox for smearing Kirkegaard.
    2. May 6 14:06 JamesfromBoston standard Smith deception libelling Kirkegaard, through quotation out of context.
    3. May 8 10:07 sarahfromscotland attacks Kirkegaard and me.
    4. May 8 10:19 sarahfromscotland
    5. May 8 10:29 sarahfromscotland attacks Kirkegaard and me.
    6. May 8 10:40 sarahfromscotland attacks Kirkegaard and me.
    7. May 8 10:53 sarahfromscotland
    8. May 8 11:04 sarahfromscotland extensive rant
    9. May 8 11:16 robertwaltons asserts impersonations but promotes Smith agenda.
    10. May 8 11:26 robertwaltons all seven comments from this account are identical
    11. May 8 11:36 robertwaltons
    12. May 8 12:01 robertwaltons
    13. May 8 12:20 robertwaltons
    14. May 8 12:35 robertwaltons
    15. May 8 12:45 robertwaltons
    16. May 8 20:17 sarahfromscotland claims child rape apology represents Kirkegaard’s “views” because he wrote them, but he wrote them, not as his views, but as a description of how a pedophile might think. And then he rejected the thinking and suggested castration. This child rape story that has been repeated all over the internet, all promoted by Oliver, (and then cited by him as proof it is true), classic deception by quotation out of context, and still supported on RatWiki. Of course that I’ve divorced seven times is brought up, as if relevant, and this is, again, standard Oliver rant. He’s pushed this in many places. (It’s misleading. . . . but this is not the place to explain it.)
    17. May 8 20:32 sarahfromscotland
    18. May 9 10:06 OliverDSmithAntifa parody troll or impersonation of Mikemikev
    19. May 9 10:29 OliverDSmithAntifa copy of above.
    • Total comments: 52
    • Comments by SPAs: 18 (plus OP)
    • Comments by Abd: 23 (I tag all SPAs because they often delete the account)
    • Comments by others: 11

    Notice the timings. It is easy to interlace timings tightly, I once tested this on Wikipedia, I was able to create more than three comments with different accounts, with the same minute timestamp. Doing that while avoiding checkuser would be a tad hairy, but possible. The length of the comments does not matter. But this is not how people ordinarily edit, and this sockmaster did not bother, it is too much trouble for too little gain.

    Why do the Smiths lie so blatantly and so obviously? They have found that it doesn’t matter. Few care, and he has learned what propagandists wrote about extensively in the last century. Lie often enough, throw enough mud, and many people will believe it. If the mud confirms what people readily believe, they will repeat it, and we place higher credence on what we hear from more than one source. Fake news. It’s a thing. “So many people saying this on the internet, must be true!” And this cuts in all directions.

    One more point here. Oliver might believe what he writes. There are conditions that create high certainty from very weak evidence, schizophrenia is one of them. Looking at the claims of the socks, and I’ve seen the same from validated Smith communications, an impression arises and then all subsequent evidence is interpreted to maintain the original impression. This is a very common problem, but it is extreme with certain psychological conditions. More ordinarily, it is “confirmation bias.” Wikipedia. RationalWiki.

    The RatWiki article is hilarious.

    Additional comment by Oliver

    @Jinx It’s the “Smith brother conspiracy theory”, there used to be an article on it but was deleted. Abd still claims there are two “Smith brothers” who edit this wiki. He never provides any evidence and just spreads misinformation.Tobias (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

    Oliver has acknowledged the brother, Darryl L. Smith, many times. The current Darryl account is John66. There may be others, but John66 is clearly a continuation of the Wikipedia account Skeptic from Britain — fingered as his brother Darryl on Encyclopedia Dramatica by a clear Oliver account (MrStrong).

    Michaeldsuarez (JuniusThaddeus) revealed that conversation because Oliver had accused me of being Skeptic from Britain, and MDS hates lying like that. However, because of the accusation, I had already investigated and concluded that, yes, SfB was Darryl. When SfB “retired” from Wikipedia, he took up on the account John66, still active, covering the same subjects. Darryl has been very active for years, with many accounts on Wikipedia and RatWiki, and would be unlikely to just disappear.

    The claim of “never provides any evidence” is a clear lie. Oliver may  argue with the evidence, but it exists, and is extensive. I have not shown all of it, by the way, because I don’t want certain sock puppetry investigation techniques revealed (I investigated socks for years on Wikipedia and elsewhere, and it is useful that sock masters do not know exactly how they reveal their identity.)

    Oliver confirmed much about his brother in his emails with me, which he later claimed were harassment, yet another lie. Those were voluntary communications, the exchange was begun by him.

    In that correspondence, he began by confirming what already I knew, by then. Later, he claimed that the whole brother story was a lie, it was all him. Now, was he lying or telling the truth?

    Wait, if he was telling the truth, the brother story was a lie, but it would still be evidence, a confession, so he is lying when he claims there is no evidence — even if there were not a mountain of evidence besides this.

    Oliver ties himself up in knots attempting to conceal reality. Oliver is facing real legal action. He’s lied too many times about too many people, some of whom may not care that he is “judgment proof.”

    Oliver does not link to the deleted article. This is common, he does not make it easy to check his claims. Here is a link to the deletion request


    Note added: I have recovered the page and it is at anglo-pyramidologist/rationalwiki-smith-brothers-conspiracy-theory/, with added commentary.

    As you will find, the article was not only deleted, but recently suppressed. This article was written from the point of view of the Smith brothers, to ridicule the “conspiracy theory.” It did not out the brothers. I was a sysop at the time, and the deletion requester was Marky, the Darryl Smith sock who had created the article on me, fulfilling on his threats. The article creator was MrOrganic, i.e., Oliver Smith. (see the suppression log for MrOrganic.) (And, by the way, if you look through contributions, Krom was Oliver Smith, that’s very well-known and admitted).

    Definitely not Rome Viharo! Some Rats are idiots. Or liars.

    If they believed this was Rome Viharo, MrOrganic would have been blocked in a flash. I have generally concluded that David Gerard is not merely deluded, he knows what he’s been doing. But I could be wrong.

    How do I know what I claim above? Well, I was there, very involved, for starters. I have also spent way too many hours studying the interactions of the Smiths, especially with RatWiki. They are recognizable and distinguishable by many signs.

    How does a tracker know what animal they are tracking by signs on the ground? Well, long experience. I’ll share this with anyone actually interested, but you will not know how to track an animal from a few words.

    And, yes, my training is in science, and I have done control experiments with some of the techniques I use. For example, they claim I linked a Smith sock with Bongolian. No, not in the least, but I did show clear evidence that Bongolian was not Debunking Spiritualism/John66.  How they converted that into an accusation of Bongolian is beyond me, but they did.)

    Bottom line, this must be understood or the situation will seem crazy and mysterious: They lie. A lot. They lie when anyone could readily determine it as such, if willing to look at evidence. Because Oliver is insane, he might not technically be lying. But Darryl is high-functioning.

    This is not some ordinary political disagreement. My general political orientation is progressive. I trust the claims of anthropogenic global warming, but . . . I confronted abuse of tools on Wikipedia to suppress information from reliable sources that might question it in some way, and the blocking of users who were called “denialists,” but who were civil and did not violate policies, because academic freedom is essential to science, and neutrality to a true encyclopedia.


    Oliver has, again and again, frothing at the mouth, revealed what had been concealed. However, to understand this, we need to know that he also lies; he tells whatever lies fit the situation. But he doesn’t realize how much is disclosed, until perhaps later. Then he may say he was lying or joking or being sarcastic. And then sometimes he is, in fact, being sarcastic, but with the truth.

    For some background, Block log for MrOrganic:

    • 01:22, 11 May 2019 D (talk | contribs) changed block settings for MrOrganic (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled, cannot edit own talk page) (tut tut, you forgot to pull talk page access)
    • 01:19, 11 May 2019 Tobias (talk | contribs) blocked MrOrganic (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) (Ban evasion: Mikemikev or Abd Lomax sock, Lomax is now trying to blame onto someone else on his blog) (unblock | change block)
    • 17:29, 9 October 2017 Abd (talk | contribs | block) blocked MrOrganic (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of 314159 seconds (about 3.6 days) (account creation disabled) (vandalism by SPA supressing completion of expression) (unblock | change block)

    and then:

    • 19:59, 9 October 2017 David Gerard (talk | contribs | block) changed group membership for Abd from Autopatrolled and Sysop to Autopatrolled (attempted harassment, ban may follow)

    So now, from User talk:D (Dysklyver, NekoDysk)


    Special:Contributions/MrOrganic is not who u think EK (talk) 11:12, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    And this brings up, WTF is EK? And how does EK know who MrOrganic was? EK is a new account created 25 Feb 2019, immediately joined (or was already a member) of the Discord server, is now a mod there, promptly opped by D the next day, with “(unabashed nepotism), ” and when later promoted for lack of demonstrated editing, re-opped by D with “(no reason to desysop, implicitly trusted)”. EK has restrained Oliver, showing much more than normal knowledge. So this is an additional clue.

    (Inb4 Tobias dumps a wall of text) I know it’s technically misidentified, but honestly it doesn’t matter who exactly it was since they definitely merited a block, and I can’t be asked to relitigate a drama from 2017. 😏 — NekoDysk 11:39, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
    @EKNekoDysk 11:55, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    MrOrganic was not identified in the block log. So he must be referring to my identification as Oliver. At the time, I suspected this was Darryl, but I have learned to distinguish these socks with far more precision. MrOrganic was Oliver, unless someone was a very sophisticated imitator, unlikely then — and still. It could be done, to be sure, but who would have a motivation to go to so much work, and especially then? I was not yet completely convinced about the Smiths, and was not particularly aware of the ED pages (though I don’t remember when I first saw them). I was only operating on suspicion that the Anglo Pyramidologist sock family was involved in the disruption I had encountered on Wikipedia and Wikiversity. I was not at that point tagging them as “Smiths”, except accidentally, once, the name being in a link that was promptly deleted.

    David Gerard knows who it is. Emails were sent when that “Smith brother conspiracy theory” page was made and he quickly deleted it.

    Indeed he did. And what has become completely clear is that the Smiths operate through private complaints. Notice that Oliver does not disclose who sent the emails and how he knows it. Gerard deleted the page with “(Harassment: yeah, no)”, but took no action against the creator, but . . . against me for blocking the creator. The formal deletion request was by Marky, i.e., the AP sock who had harassed me on Wikipedia, and who had objected to my using the name “Anglo Pyramidologist” for the sock family — that is the Wikipedia name for the SPI archive — claiming that he was not Anglo, and he wasn’t. He was Darryl. Or there is a third brother, which was hinted, and there is an older brother in the family, which could explain some mysteries. I have not named that brother, but others have shown the documentation.

    But the evidence is strong that MrOrganic was Oliver. He still shows the same idiosyncracies.

    The problem is Abd/Mike are known to create impersonator accounts, double impersonations (accounts attacking themselves while impersonating an impersonator) and well… it’s just confusing and insane. But the purpose of that account was doxing.

    The purpose was to head off doxxing by labelling it a “conspiracy theory,” and that’s obvious. As to impersonator accounts, they have been common on RatWiki for a long time. But Oliver confuses parody accounts and other non-impersonations with impersonations. If MrOrganic was an impersonation, of whom? MrOrganic did display many Smith behaviors, and was recognized — probably by Mikemikev — but . . . the was a Smith sysop account active at that point, Skeptical. If MrOrganic was a Smith impersonator, why did Skeptical not block? Instead, Skeptical went after me.

    (I have never created an impersonator account. I have created investigative accounts, and my policy is not to disclose them, not to respond to accusations. These accounts are not disruptive. Impersonation accounts deliberately offend and troll and spam, not as pure trolling, but with an agenda: to prove that the impersonated individual is really bad, vicious, etc. As an example, the account that appears here could easily be Mikemikev. It looks immediately like Mikemikev. That, then, could be an impersonation, or, the obvious, it could be Mikemikev. In the absence of other information, I do assume it was Mikemikev.

    Lomax has admitted to using accounts with “Smith” in the title on RationalWiki, see for example Some random Smith.

    Just fact: I have not admitted that.

    He originally lied and denied that account was him, but since the evidence was so conclusive (Gerard identified his writing style) he’s now changed his mind. Tobias (talk) 12:48, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    I have not denied that I was that account, either. As I’ve written, policy. Gerard will think any detailed explanation of something is me. No edits were pointed to, and what Oliver is assuming here is that Gerard had intimate knowledge of my style, but from where? Years ago, perhaps, when he tried to promote me. That intervention by Gerard was, to me, diagnostic that Gerard was protecting Oliver, because the edit that got Some random Smith immediately attacked by a probable Oliver sock, with Gerard intervening promptly — rare for him! — was simply to add an obvious comment to a deletion discussion. Absolutely not disruptive and far, far from wall of text.

    Using Smith in an account name is not impersonation, and the proof is that there was no suspicion of this account until it was whacked for knowing too much. (And good contributions were deleted. Go figure. Someone in the RatWiki shadow world has protecting the Smiths as a high priority.)

    @D Lomax is lying on Reddit already and disputing your hiding of edits “It did not contain ‘Personal or potentially identifying information,’ as you can see was the suppression reason.”

    I did not “disparage” D. I merely stated that the article did not contain such information, relative to what is widely known and accepted. I.e., many Rats have called Smith socks “Smith,” now. If I state that a page does not contain something, and someone else thinks it does, this does not make either one of us into a liar, except in the Universe of Oliver Smith, where everyone else is lying.

    Which to me is just an acknowledgement that MrOrganic is him since he didn’t see that account as doxing, when it obviously was doing exactly that and I had to complain to Gerard to delete what that user was posting.Tobias (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    People should know this about schizophrenia. The person will see everything as a clue confirming his or her fantasies. It can be overwhelming, because “proof” is everywhere. Humans have exquisite pattern-recognition capabilities, but if we believe the patterns we see, we can fall into paranoid fantasies. I have worked with schizophrenics, and the path to recovery is learning to be skeptical of our own ideas, to notice emotional reactions to ideas, to make reasonable judgments about “emergencies,” (Like, call the police! Don’t just complain!) and to postpone judgment otherwise.

    There was no emergency with that article, because anyone looking could find all that information, easily. And then, if it was true doxxing, it would have called for immediate suppression, which was not done.

    In any case, I have recovered the article, and D or anyone who can read suppressed files can confirm what I have posted. So people can judge for themselves, which Oliver desperately attempts to prevent. Or someone is attempting to prevent it, to bury actual evidence in piles of trolling and furious argument.

    (I’d like to know what the References were. If it was a link to a certain WWHP page, it might have been “personal information,” indeed. But I rather doubt it was that.)


    Lomax is also still lying and claiming he was unfairly banned because he was not Cooped. However there was a Coop made and all sysops there voted to ban him. So he lies pretty much about everything.Tobias (talk) 13:14, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    What Oliver claims here is not necessarily a lie. Rather, he is interpreting what I wrote, and history, in a very weird way. I was promoted by Gerard without a cooping. I was blocked by Skeptical (Oliver!) without a cooping. And that’s just a verifiable fact. Later, because I had pointed to the deficiency, there was some formality; as I recall it did not follow policy, but there really is no policy on RatWiki, it’s mob rule, and I don’t GAF about “unfair.” “All sysops voted to ban” was after how long, how many, and based on what?

    By that time there had been many impersonation socks disrupting RatWiki, attacking users, making legal threats, and taking pieces of text from my blog and spamming them. If you believed I was doing that — and many Rats obviously did believe it — of course you would vote to ban. And this demonstrates how the Smiths have operated.

    I had zero history of anything like impersonation, or being accused of impersonation, before the Smiths started claiming it about me — and claiming “proof” from what is not proof. The only example they have given is Some random Smith, who was obviously not an impersonator. If I put on an orange wig and shout “Lock her up!” would that be impersonation of the POTUS? Of course not, not in the sense claimed here.

    Is Oliver claiming that MrOrganic was impersonating him? How? The fact is that impersonation socking is relatively rare, I had never seen it on Wikipedia before I encountered what Darryl did there. And it worked, probably because Wikipedians are naive. If an account writes, spamming his message, “I am WikiversityUser, writing the truth about Psychic Phenomena,” and YOU CAN’T STOP ME, IDIOT” it never seems to occur to them that this might not be WikiversityUser, but a declared enemy.

    Oliver always lies. Rubber Room (talk) 13:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Frankly, I’d prefer that Mikemikev — if this is him — stop with the trolling. On the other hand, it does serve an obvious purpose. If you want to know if an account is Oliver Smith, or show it, poke him, especially poke him with his name. If the user comes unglued and starts raving about Mikemikev, it is almost certainly Oliver. In this case, we already know that this is Oliver, and so does Mikemikev, so this was trolling.

    • MrOrganic was accused of being Krom (i.e., Oliver) and responded with Oliver arguments (remember, I was a sysop at this point, starting to notice the mess with EmilOWK and impersonators of him.)
    • Skeptical (see his contributions after that)

    Erm no, that’s all you do Mike. I even gave you a chance on your article talk yet you instead resorted to creating more troll socks because you know you have no argument and are an admitted liar.Tobias (talk) 13:35, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Yes. Comes unglued. I was going to write about that nutso “chance.” Oliver is carrying on a conversation with Mike, on D’s talk page. D has been advising him to ignore Mike — which is basic standard wiki advice. If he wants a conversation with Mike, he could go to Rubber Room talk, instead of inflicting it on everyone else. An appropriate name, eh? Had he done so, instead of, say, deleting the comment on Talk:D, and going to that talk page and asking for what he claims to have permitted, he just raved. And so D did block, Mike accounts generally being blocked on sight.

    This is what Oliver had done:

    D had created that Talk page and protected it, and put up a warning:

      • Michael Coombs loves to troll people in connection to his article. Do not engage.

    Oliver ignored that and put this on that page:

    Invitation to Mikemikev

    Mikemikev has been socking on countless accounts here claiming his article contains “defamation”. As I recently responded to @D:

    Is Mikemikev no longer a Nazi/white nationalist and so is complaining the article is defamatory because it only reflects his old political views? The problem with that is his current Gab account is filled with same old extreme racism, anti-Semitism and his support for far-right/Nazi groups. I see no change in his political views whatsoever and everything on the article is accurate and well sourced.Tobias (talk) 16:08, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

    So I would like to see what Mikemikev has to say since he continues to scream “defamation” but cannot show any evidence for this.

    I’m unlocking this for 24 hours so Mike has a chance to respond on point. However if he shows up to troll and attack me, it will get locked again. Mikemikev needs to specifically list what is “defamation” on his article and I’m giving him a chance to do that. Failure to do so would mean he’s (as expected) a total liar. Tobias (talk) 16:17, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

    There were major problems with this. Mikemike is banned on RatWiki, and Oliver does not have the right to unban. If Mikemikev were to show up, he’d be blocked, so an orderly conversation would probably not be possible. Further, Oliver also imagines what Mike would say and already argues against it. What would be the p0int? Then, this is not directed to any RatWiki acccount and even if it were, it is unreliable that a suggestion like this would be noticed within 24 hours. So “failure to do so” would a “proof” like many of Oliver’s “proofs.” Meaningless. I have never seen a list of problems with the article from Mikemikev, and Oliver does not — as usual — link to any of what he claims, other than the GAB account, which has a lot of traffic. Oliver was grandstanding here, as we can see from follows on User talk:D.

    If an actual conversation is truly desired, I could arrange it. If private email (Oliver could surely do this with a known account), fine, but it could be done on the subreddit I started, What_RationalWiki.

    I will not tolerate impersonation socking there. Any account purporting to be a real person or an identified account from another site will be kicked if not verifiable. Trolling will not be tolerated. But if Mike, verified, quotes the RatWiki article and claims error or defamation, that would be allowed. Attacking the site or Oliver or anyone else with ad hominem arguments will be warned and possibly kicked first, questions asked later. My goal is free speech, but not license.

    That removal of protection was reversed in less than 24 hours, but it doesn’t matter. The whole thing was a Bad Idea disguised as good and reasonable. I am willing to mediate any negotiations, if someone on any of the sides involved here wants to try that. I’m easy to reach privately. Leaving a comment here and asking for anonymity will do it. I will see the comment and will not approve it. But trolls — i.e, accounts that troll — will be roasted for snacks.

    On Gab you’re still lying calling me a Marxist or Antifa. After 6 years you’ve never provided any evidence for those false claims (impersonating me on fake accounts like you always do claiming to be a Marxist don’t count).Tobias (talk) 13:40, 11 May 2019 (UTC)


    Funny how it’s always you whose the Marxist Antifa and not the real one lmao. Regarding the page, that page did contain personally identifying information, but I don’t personally think it was a Mikemikev sock given that accounts other edits. It could be Abd as you say, or it could be that Viharo person, or another third party *ahem*. Like I said, I don’t think it matters a lot. I gave up reading Reddit, but I read what was mentioned about it on the Cold Fusion site so I can see why you acted on it now. — NekoDysk 13:47, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    I have been accused of “defending” Mikemikev, again and again. I have never accused Oliver of being Marxist antifa, nor do I consider that plausible. Mikemikev may accuse people whatever he thinks may get a rise out of them, as D has been pointing out: it works.

    RationalWiki, as a whole, has a habit of insulting trolls and vandals and banned users. Which is the strongest thing you can do to encourage them to keep it up, at least with males in adolescence and often beyond. (Stereotypically, women are more likely to sensibly walk away.) It’s probably genetic, a basic male survival trait.

    I thank D for reading the site, at least some of it. I do have strong and relatively direct evidence that MrOrganic was Oliver. However, evidence can be misleading. It was certainly not me. It’s very unlikely it would be Viharo, it is totally the opposite of what he’d be interested in doing, and impersonation was not his game at all. (If MrOrganic was impersonating, he was impersonating the standard Smith brother argument, repeated, for example, by Skeptical on the article on me. So why would Viharo do that? It makes no sense, like many Smith arguments.) Mikemikev, at that point, also makes no sense.

    But there is a possibility of a “third party.” It could be Darryl, but that is contradicted by the other evidence. Interests did overlap with Darryl some, but the brothers do that. There have been claims of another person involved. Might as well say the name, since for a long time Oliver has been claiming that his family is being attacked. But is it an attack to suggest that someone wrote material that has been alleged to be written by a Smith brother? Only if the material itself impeaches the person.

    So the name is Adam L. Smith. Oliver and Darryl were born in 1990. Adam L. Smith is about five years older. I know nothing about Adam, other than his name in the household. I put the name here in case someone else can connect the dots. As well, the person I came to assume was Darryl used the name Leon Kennedy on Facebook (account since deleted), and Leon on another occasion. There have been hints of a third person complaining to the WMF, and probably living close to the Smiths.

    However, it is highly unlikely this was MrOrganic, there are too many Oliver connections.

    Another tidbit. 

    Uh, hello? Anybody home? There is an obvious suspect for identity of KE, though, in fact, it could be many people, because Oliver has offended many over the years, and they accumultate. This is what KE posted. on Argumentum ad hominem

    Case study

    A person who’s too dumb to debate and gets so butthurt he resorts to one years long ad hominem is Oliver D. Smith. Ironically he does this on “Rationalwiki”.

    This was blatant trolling, even though there is a truth behind it. Oliver’s arguments are often splendid examples of argumentum ad hominem. But there is no way that I’d post this to RatWiki. I don’t troll, except in very narrow circumstances for very specific purpose (in which case you will likely see fireworks, such as the desysopping of a Wikipedia administrator, which can be, eh, a tad difficult.) In any case, Oliver noticed and decided to correct it, he can be a bit obsessive about that.

    12:27, 11 May 2019 Tobias (talk | contribs) changed block settings for Kerflicity Entwhistle (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled, cannot edit own talk page) (Ban evasion: it’s mikemikev)

    I don’t know how Oliver was so sure that this was Mikemikev, unless he does know that I don’t troll like that. He’s claiming that I’m known for impersonation, so how would he know that this wasn’t me impersonating Mike impersonating Michael D Suarez or maybe Rome Viharo or Emil Kirkegaard. Or someone from Kiwi Farns? Or his brother poking him, as brothers sometimes do? In any case I can state with perfect confidence that it’s much more likely to be Mikemikev than me! So thanks, Oliver, every little bit helps.

    I thought I might be finished but this went on and on.

    For clarification Abd is mistaken about doxing. In 2017 there was an anti-dox policy on my name. Kirkegaard was banned in 2017 for doxing me (among other things) so that’s why MrOrganic’s doxing was deleted by Gerard after I sent an email complaint.

    “Anti-dox policy.” No. Anti-dox practice. It could not be a policy. I once wrote about Rule 0 on Wikipedia. Rule 0 is the rule that you cannot mention. You can mention Rule 0, but not the content of it, as long as you don’t hint at the content.

    Here Oliver has let us know that it was, in fact, he who sent the complaint and that Gerard hastened to protect him. Numerous users were banned for daring to mention the obvious. I’ve seen many places where account identification were made (i.e., User X is User Y), which is not “doxxing.” Oliver has done this routinely, I could find many examples.

    Gerard dysopped me for blocking the user who is now being called an imposter and troll and doxxer. Oliver tells pieces of stories, pieces that back up the point he’s trying to make (which is usually that someone else is lying). He never tells the whole truth, the simple truth. He claims here that I am “mistaken,” but has not quoted what was actually wrong.

    Contrary to Abd’s claims there was little public information about me on the internet in 2017 (aside from a troll page written by Mike on Enc Dramatica).

    There was a lot of information. “Mike” on ED would be Michael D. Suarez, not mikemikev. There was Kiwi Farms. There was Rome Viharo’s blog. There was GethN7. And, of course, there were the Anglo Pyramidologist sock puppet investigations, which did not give the name. When I accidentally included a link in a page on SPA trolling, that included the name of Smith, a obscure user page study on Wikiversity, an avalanche of attacks descended, my contributions were being closely tracked, because I had interfered with the Smith agenda. This was not Oliver, I’m reasonaby sure. It was Darryl. I did not start using the name of Smith until I had verified much more evidence. But “you know you are over the target when the flak is the thickest.” I was threatened with massive harm if I simply continued collecting data.

    So I knew.

    Back then I didn’t really come public about my identity on RationalWiki which is why that anti-dox policy existed to protect me.

    Makes sense. He’s not lying here. But . . . why a special policy to protect Oliver Smith from his name being mentioned, but not some of his targets? What Oliver is doing here is confirming Rome Viharo’s “conspiracy theory,” that involves David Gerard and others. Viharo had also tangled with Darryl Smith (as Goblin Face nee Dan Skeptic). Oliver only went after alleged racists and neo-Nazis, but that shaded into scientists working in intelligence research, allegedly hereditarians (and racists are generally hereditarian, but not all hereditarians are racists.)

    I only identified myself from 2018 after Kirkegaard had gone around the internet writing various defamatory pages about me,

    It’s not defamation if it is (a) true or (b) harmless. And he had definitely defamed Kirkegaard, and it was actionable.

    hence that year I was on RWW and created a page about myself to counter the lies Kirkegaard was writing about me. RWW was though shut down and I don’t have any further interest in trying to counter lies about me on websites, for example I’ve never bothered with rebutting the VDARE hit-piece and I deleted an old response I made to Kirkegaard.Tobias (talk) 14:02, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Mmmm. Old response where?  Not on RatWiki. Oliver went on RatWikiWiki and started writing about me. And Kirkegaard. And Mikemikev. And himself. And what “lies” of Kirkegaard? Oliver could easily point to a Kirkegaard page and annotate “lies.” I do it all the time with hypothes.is.

    However, it is much easier to just call it all “lies,” like a certain President and his “fake news.” I’ve asked Oliver again and again to confirm or deny account identifications. He always responded that it was too much trouble. It should be a few minutes work. (The number of his accounts has often been exaggerated, but there are many troll accounts difficult to identify with only one or two edits; still, I can identify most of the accounts on sight, quickly, so he could do it even more easily.

    What I’ve told him again and again is that the way out of this mess is to tell the truth, the whole truth, not to keep claiming that other people are lying, even if they are wrong about this or that. That’s the way to say it, if you don’t want to look like a liar, yourself. “This was correct, but that was incorrect. Any questions?” And then answer the questions honestly. This is about fact, not interpretation. and I would say that Oliver desperately needs to learn the difference. It would save him a lot of grief.

    People are mad now that I suppressed stuff doxxing you and not various edits doxxing others. Aw man, I can’t do everything all at once. — NekoDysk 14:09, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Who is “people”? I’m certainly not “mad.” I have a suspicion that Dysklyver is operating under some possibly difficult conditions, but I do not convert suspicion to belief. And I trust Dysklyver. The question here is not whether that was “doxxing” under the conditions then, but whether it was doxxing *now*, deserving suppression, where the only apparent “doxxing” was the name of “Smith.” There is an incongruity here, an inconsistency, but I don’t get mad about people being inconsistent. Nor do I call it hypocrisy. Rather, it can be something to look at, that’s all.

    Michael Coombs and Abd both have articles here, so its not possible to dox them as all their information is already public.

    I have not complained about doxxing. The examples I have seen where doxxing by Oliver was allowed were with much less known persons. I was arguably a public figure, and I revealed my legal name very early as a Wikipedian, because I have never been hiding, and I was writing on topics where, real world, people have been assassinated. I take the risk.

    Michael Coombs may be a different story, but I have not investigated that. I’ve seen some shaky stuff, though. People have been real-world harassed, employers, etc. That’s a story for another day.

    As for was their information public before their article creations: yes. Mike prior to his article here was already infamous for his trolling and a google search of his name produced lots of pages about him before the RationalWiki article; he’s got a Kiwi Farms thread that runs around 680 pages with 700,000 views.

    This is all irrelevant, actually. None of this was about whether or not Mikemikev was doxxed. But Oliver makes up accusations and then answers them with furious argument.

    Lomax also has a visible online presence, owns his own website and has written various autobiographical pages about himself across the internet. This was quite the opposite of me prior to 2018.Tobias (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    What one will find if one looks is that I’ve been visible since the 1980s, on-line. We can see in recent claims that I am supposedly “well-known” as a troll and impersonator, but in spite of intense internet activity beginning way back then, and amping up in the 1990s and later, accusation of trolling or harassment amounted to single incidents that one can find by intense search — and by ignoring the context.

    Yes, Oliver was much more obscure, by comparison, under his real name. Hence the early documentation pages on him referred to his best-known early account, Atlantid, metapedia administrator. That’s where he tangled with Mikemikev, who was also admin there.

    A final point: both these idiots Mike & Abd have tried several times to create an article about me here (although they got quickly deleted for being low quality and personal attacks), yet they moan I’ve had some involvement in editing their articles. Tobias (talk) 15:12, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    I never tried to create an article on Oliver on RatWiki. Is he lying or deluded? And does it make a difference? If he were honest, when he’s going to make a claim like that, he’d find a link. Memory is imperfect, we are human and become confused. However, he might be referring to a sock study. Long ago I copied that to a page here.

    User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist

    This was my first study of RatWiki “Anglo Pyramidologist” socks. As can be seen, it does not mention “Smith” anywhere. My identification skills were still primitive (but many socks are very, very obvious if one simply looks).

    It was immediately proposed for deletion by Marky. It’s worth looking at, this sequence shows how the Smiths were operating. (It was deleted by Skeptical, i.e., Oliver)

    As can be seen, there was no doxxing in the study. It was a list of suspected socks of “Anglo Pyramidologist.” To be clear, AP was the name on Wikipedia of the Sock Puppet Investigations case archive. The original Anglo Pyramidologist was Oliver, but this was not a claim that those accounts were Oliver, and I did not know at the time how to distinguish the two brothers. I also did not know at the time that the Smiths were under special protection, the “policy” Oliver mentions. The AfD has this argument:


    Abd ul-Rahman Lomax‘s personal vendetta against a skeptical Wikipedia user who he seems to be stalking across the web. Not relevant to Rationalwiki. Marky (talk) 15:42, 18 October 2017 (UTC)


    User page study, only likely visible to someone following my contributions (as happened on wikiversity and meta). As created, and as nominated,[1], 34 minutes after creation, it only contained the name of Anglo Pyramidologist (the Wikipedia name for the sock family) and myself. Now, I have added a small fraction of the possible names, I suspect it will be hundreds. This is only a list of suspects for a user who claims to have been a major contributor to RationalWiki, and who has documented many supposed enemies of skepticism, with articles here. On Wikiversity, and on the meta wiki, he threw a screaming fit as he has thrown here upon the creation of this page.[2] The behavior was identical, the same themes. From my history on meta, I expect that 95% or so of these “suspected socks” will actually be AP socks. The outcome there was a massive series of global locks, and, on meta, semiprotection of my study pages. That could be appropriate here. Not my call. But meanwhile, my condolences to Skeptical. AP is insane. This is either two brothers, one saner than the other, or one person who can contain himself to avoid looking so cranky, until it breaks through. I have, as yet, no opinion on the old claim of “brothers.” I form opinions based on evidence, not on wishful thinking or emotional reactions, and not even on what a friend says. People make mistakes, we all do.

    As to “mission,” this isn’t an article, but there are plenty of pages in RationalWiki that look at user behavior. I don’t think that AP is notable enough for an article, unless blog sources are to be used. (As they have been for me, so maybe.) This user has long outed others…. So far, nothing I’ve done actually outs him more than he has outed himself. –Abd (talk) 18:26, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

    The situation at this point is that Marky had created the article on me and massive disruption has arisen (over the RW Smith Brothers conspiracy theory article).  So, somehow, my looking at RatWiki is “stalking a skeptical Wikipedia user all over the internet.” What skeptical user? AP pretends to be skeptical, may have made a business out of writing skeptical articles, it has been plausibly claimed (by him and others).

    Oliver talks about “moaning.” That is troll-speak for describing a situation. What he claims I’m moaning about makes no sense. In context, I looked at the AP socks that had edited my arcticle, after Marky created it. That is just fact — if those are actually AP socks.  “Some involvement”, hah! Very involved, but so what? Oliver Smith evaded much detection by continually changing his accounts, without any apparent necessity. Users who do that are often up to no good. They are making it difficult to track them. They are hiding. Oliver now, is open, and it can be seen how he behaves, over time. RatWiki will choose to allow the continual drama, or not. Some people like it.

    Well pretty good quality compared to the normal screed. :p I did suppress those a while back along the page Mike or someone wrote about me, which got deleted pretty quick. — NekoDysk15:17, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Yes. suppression log. Arthur_Kerensa

    (I would not put his here if Dysklyver clearly does not conceal his identity, and I have offered before to redact stuff. He doesn’t care, and, in fact, I commend him. Hiding is no way to live. But there are costs as there always are with what is excellent.)

    Stupid waste of time.

    When you ban people, that is often what they do, take great pleasure in wasting your time. Some level of this is unavoidable, to be sure. But RatWiki has not learned from Wikipedia, which has also not always learned from their own history (because they keep losing the most experienced users, as they burn out from how inefficient the system is). Insulting trolls is a formula for generating more trolling. Much more.

    Discussion here about Smith brother conspiracy theory. Lomax is still claiming User:John66 is somehow a “Smith brother”. No evidence ever presented.Tobias (talk) 15:30, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Well, I’ve presented it in great detail, but, now, who wants to know? If someone needs to know, they can ask me, and I will consider the situation and probably walk them through it. I’m not documenting that all over again just because an admitted liar and full-on troll claims “no evidence.” Why bring it up here?

    But thanks to Oliver for the link to that discussion, where he lies profusely to the RatWiki community. Because these things tend to disappear, archive.is.

    Ah but we all know that John66 is acktushally a sockpuppet of Bongolian. /s — NekoDysk 15:43, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

    Definitely. Oliver is schizophrenic and while he lives in England, his alter ego lives on the west coast of North America. I analyzed the letter frequencies in their posts and sorted them by revision number, and I found the coded message that revealed the entire evil plot. Hah! No evidence? They think they can hide from me?

    March 12, 2019

    Oliver keeps supplying more material. I’ve been working on his deceptions about impersonation socking on Encyclopedia Dramatica and RationalWikiWiki — and even Wrongpedia, here, still a draft: anglo-pyramidologist/blaming-it-all-on-mikemikev/

    From the same thread:

    Lomax is still blatantly lying on Reddit. As I explained above, there was an anti-dox policy on my name in 2017 hence anyone who mentioned my name, or surname was blocked and had their comment deleted to protect me. When two people accuse each either other of being liars – a 3rd party can easily check the truth and Lomax is clearly the liar e.g. there were dozens of accounts blocked for mentioning merely my surname in 2017. According to Lomax’s insane story I created an article here to dox myself (that I then emailed Gerard to delete for harassment). I honestly believe lying to him is a compulsion and he might not know he’s doing it because its so habitual for him.Tobias (talk) 18:31, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

    Tobias still claims that what could obviously not have been a “policy,” i.e., an open rule, was in place, and he would not have considered that this “policy” — actually simply common practice — would apply to him. And the purpose of the article was not to doxx, but to ridicule the “conspiracy theory,” and “Smith” would not be enough to actually dox. (See the argument in the AfD for that article, also deleted by David Gerard.)

    Oliver is attempting to prove that I’m lying by claiming that I said things I did not say (which has been common). There were indeed many blocked for mentioning Smith. But MrOrganic mentioned Smith and was not blocked then. Except by me, incidentally, for a different reason. Why not, then? Because the article did not doxx him — read it! (unless he actually did link to the doxxing on Rome Viharo’s blog) his argument falls apart. As to lying, again, see this page, where I show — with strong evidence — that Oliver lied about impersonation socks, claiming that accounts that we now know for sure were him, were Mikemikev socks. That is straight-out lying, not merely a difference of interpretation (which Oliver often calls “Lies!”)

    Oliver asserts that the article was deleted because of his email to Gerard, but we have no evidence that he sent such an email. He did email Gerard whenever he wanted assistance, but unless copies are provided we have only Oliver’s claim of what was in mails, and he has lied about emails (which I know because they were with me — and anyone can know because they were published more than a year ago, and Oliver certainly knew about that but never denied the mails were presented as they existed.)

    Oliver does not understand how evidence and testimony work. Personal testimony, under oath, is legally admissible. What I write on the blog is not under oath, to be sure, but I have a reputation to protect for honesty, as a journalist, it is may major asset. I’m not going to lie to win some stupid argument!

    All pages here are open for comment, and correction has always been corrected. Instead of pointing out errors, which would always be allowed from a subject, Oliver has, for a long time now, just cried “Lies!” He has no credibility, from that alone. But there is evidence rising to the level of proof linked from the page referenced above, that Oliver lies — or is truly deluded, not remembering what he did, or the like.

    Yet more lies from Lomax (all this guy does is lie, lie and lie more…): “googling ‘Smith brothers conspiracy theory’ and you will find interesting stuff” — No all you find is his crazy blog filled with lies; page 2 of google search shows “John66 – Cold Fusion Community coldfusioncommunity.net/”. Googling Smith brothers conspiracy theory and you only get the lies he writes on his blog, with the exception of the deletion request to the old RW article. Virtually no one else is typing about this nonsense except him.Tobias (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

    Whether something is interesting or not is a matter of opinion, and would rarely be a lie. Oliver mentioned “Smith brothers conspiracy theory,” which, if he didn’t want this all to be visible, he’d not mention at all. But he is insane, that’s obvious! I simply pointed out what happens if you google the phrase. But it was “brother,” not “brothers,” because that’s how he had written it. What I do which drives him crazy is check out what he writes. He does not expect people to do that. He referred to Wrongpedia in an RWW page, I dug up the page. I don’t just assume he’s wrong. And I have done this kind of thing for many years. I actually research, find and point to evidence, before publishing analysis. And then he claims “no evidence.” Yeah, right!

    Virtually no one else? Well, Oliver Smith is, a lot! I write for the future, and what does it matter if someone else is looking at what I write about? Oliver writes for the immediate argument he is trying to win. I don’t care about winning arguments. I learn more when I lose an argument, in fact, but that can be hard to come by! (To be more accurate, I don’t think in terms of winning and losing, I care about reality, and trust it, completely. I do not trust my own opinions, except provisionally, as operating hypotheses. What I trust fully is reality itself, it is actually my religion, and that of anyone who joins me in that trust.)

    Perhaps that is the case now, but it is my understanding that at the time Rome Viharo was the main proponent of this idea and although I have my ideas, it is widely believed that it was Viharo who wrote the RationalWiki page on the Smith brothers conspiracy theory. — NekoDysk 20:58, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

    Dysklyver knows more than he says, which can be a mark of the wise. He is correct that “Rome Viharo” was an opinion then. That was incorrect, I have no doubt about that. It was the common Smith story that Rome was crazy and believed this “conspiracy theory,” and, in fact, Rome did connect what he’d seen with a kind of behind-the-scenes conspiracy. I don’t promote that, but I will say that there are hints, Rome is not crazy, but not necessarily informed well on details. He asserts from inconclusive evidence, which is not uncommon, is it?

    Possibly. My main point is its bizarre to claim I created that article since I sent an email complaint to get it removed & I didn’t want my name mention on this wiki back then. Notice as well Lomax presents zero evidence for his wild allegations, yet is now creating Reddit threads to spread these lies about me. This is what I’ve had to put up with from this vicious troll now for years.Tobias (talk) 21:10, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

    Oliver asserts unverifiable evidence (the alleged email), as if not believing his unverifiable claims is “wild.” Oliver has admittedly been creating articles on people for years, full of defamation or, at best, presentation of facts about people to put them in the worse possible light.

    I was viciously attacked when I protected a Wikiversity user and the academic freedom of that site, and when I blow the whistle, and tell the truth, with evidence, I’m called “King of the trolls.” These are fascists, they hate freedom of expression and are intolerant of diversity.

    How does it feel, Oliver? I have not done with you what you have done with others. I have not exaggerated, and I have afforded you full opportunity to respond, without a 24-hour deadline under impossible conditions, as you gave Mikemikev, quite arrogantly.

    Thanks for the link to the Reddit thread. Every bit helps.  Expect more if there is more drama. That subreddit is for the uncensored discussion of RatWiki activity. It will be fairly moderated, that’s a commitment. But trolling by throwaway accounts will not be tolerated. Differences of opinion are not trolling, and if anyone doesn’t know what trolling is, ask. Trolling is deliberate, or it is not trolling, it might merely be stupid or ignorant.

    And then he added a little more:

    Sometimes it’s hard to distinguish between these idiots. For example on some accounts you blocked as “Abd/Mike” and I’ve also confused these two, or if we add RV or another possible troll, three; Lomax then latches onto this and screams on his blog “I’M A PROVEN LIAR!!!” etc when I misidentify his for Mike’s sockpuppet or vice-versa. The reality is they’re both very similar creating countless sockpuppets here and engaging in creating fake accounts and impersonations.Tobias (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

    Oliver is a proven liar, but over things where he would clearly know the truth. Here, he either does not mention or covers up that his brother has done a great deal of impersonation socking that Oliver blamed on Mikemikev (or sometimes the Reddit socks claim it was all me, who is behind them? Unlikely it’s Mikemikev, Oliver claims they are not him, but that does leave Darryl).

    I do not consider an identification error a “lie.” Oliver does, all the time. And he does even when it is not an error!

    Suggestion: do not proclaim as fact what is only weak speculation. Be honest. If you suspect, say you suspect. Oliver has called statements of suspicion “Lies.” That is a hysterical over-reaction. If someone suspects, and states the suspicion, it is not a lie unless they know for a fact that it is wrong. This extreme Oliver reactivity is part and parcel of his insanity.

    And, my guess, he believes that since others are “lying” about him, it’s acceptable to lie about them. But lies contaminate the liar. If you lie in return, the Father of Lies wins.

    I have not edited RationalWiki for months. I started at one point to list all my edits. I may take that up again. There is an exception. I create accounts for investigation. These accounts are never disruptive, are not intended to be visible. Those, I will not disclose unless legally necessary. I have not created accounts on RatWiki to spam or to be disruptive or to troll. But once in a while I might poke someone, to test reaction, to learn from this, which can be a form of trolling. This is actually quite rare. But if I find any, I will disclose those.

    Trolls are routinely blocked unless they are supported by the mob. If an account is trolling, it is almost certainly not me. Posting links to my blog has not been done by me for a very long time. But, again, if I’ve done it, I’ll list it.

    Nearly all accounts claimed to be mine on RW were not.

    If I am correct, Mikemikev is creating many accounts, that’s a long-term behavior, I think. And that is normal at his age, in fact. When a young man is told he must go away, shut up, he will often do the opposite, which is why it is a very bad idea to insult trolls. Unless you want more trolling.

    Certainly Mikemikev might point to this blog, here or there. I have never asked him to do this, nor would I. Now, this is the paradox here. RationalWiki documents “pseudoscience” and “conspiracy theories,” and I am allegedly promoting a conspiracy theory. So why not coverage of this on RatWiki?

    I think the answer relatively obvious, but it’s not certain, and the matter is complex.

    Tobias went on and on and on. Too much to copy. He pointed out some possible errors on other pages, but I’d have to remember what they were and can’t be arsed. I commented on the rest of his ravings here.

    End of the road

    This got even crazier, and Oliver got himself banned from RatWiki. See Oliver Discord fiasco

    He completely bollixed his last chance, for basically nothing but shooting off his mouth about his paranoia. I suppose it’s a compulsion. As they said on the Discord server, this guy needs help, in a big way. I find it sad, because Oliver is merely insane, Darryl, whom Oliver was trying to protect, is downright vicious. He may be a tougher nut to crack. But it can be done.

    Oliver D. Smith

    This subpage will list RationalWiki accounts identified or suspected of being Oliver D. Smith, with the registration date. Where a subpage exists, it will be linked.

    Tobias 10:46, 12 April 2019

    WikipediaSucks on Oliver Smith

    I’m compiling a comprehensive list of Smith socks and keep finding stuff, like this WikipediaSucks (Proboards) archive, Oliver Smith-WWHP thread (moved)

    In this thread, archaic, registered Jun 24, 2016 at 10:55pm, clearly Oliver Smith, attacks Rome Viharo, copying a post that was spammed to RatWiki, 19 June 2016. (and see also 17 June 2016, and 18 June 2016, deleted contributions accusing Oliver D. Smith of being Dan Skeptic (Wikipedia) and David1234 (RatWiki). It is claimed that this spamming led to Viharo’s ban. That may be true, but it is also quite possible that this was impersonation, at least some of it. Spamming known content from a person though impersonation socking is a Smith technique. Or this was actually what it claimed to be, an investigator, I have not tracked this down.

    In any case, the claim about Dan Skeptic and David1234 was incorrect, and Oliver is like a Jack-in-the-box, he pops up when you push a button, and this particular kind of error is such. As Schizophrenic, he corrected this claim, in edits later hidden by Debunking spiritualism (in a spree that the Rats blamed on me having hacked his account, which was, ah, a tad mistaken. DS was Darryl L. Smith, Oliver’s twin brother, as was Dan Skeptic, also known as Goblin Face on Wikipedia, and David1234 on RatWiki. DS attempted to hide this correction by Oliver, but it was reverted, and archived. (This is an additional piece of evidence that DS was Darryl. Schizophrenic elsewhere referred to DS as his brother, and so the story that Schizophrenic was an impersonator was developed, years later. But DS has been blocked, actually as if Oliver Smith (Aeschylus), which is not quite correct.)

    The WWHP page reports  a threat. That’s quite what I saw when I started exposing Smith impersonation socking in 2017. I was threatened. And then it is claimed that Viharo was threatening himself, to get attention. They have a story they repeat over and over with different people.

    Michael D. Suarez (registered Mar 17, 2016 at 9:21pm) immediately outed him as Oliver, pointing to ED articles with details.  Oliver, as archaic, lies, claiming “I don’t own any of these accounts..” A huge number of accounts were listed, and some of them were later admitted. archaic then points to three accounts (URL corrected to current domain)

    Classic Smith misdirection. The first two were parody socks, not actually impersonations. The third may be Smith, (i.e., Krom), but could also be Mikemikev, perhaps, and Kroms is deceptive. I see multiple conflicting signs. I may investigate this more deeply later.

    But RatWiki Kroms was Oliver.

    Krom on ED and on RatWiki was Oliver.

    So what accounts was Oliver denying?

    ED User_talk:JuniusThaddeus/Archive5

    ED Talk:RationalWiki

    • Kromscape long term obvious Krom, i.e. Oliver

    ED Thizzlehat_Junction_Center

    broken kiwi farms archive . Closest I could find to this was http://archive.is/0k9ZV mentioned:

    • Atlantid, clearly Oliver
    • TombRaiderFan, Kiwi account, probably Oliver
    • Krom (RW account primarily)
    • BookGremlin or Gremlin — not verified yet
    • Truthseeker — not verified yet
    • and others

    Encyclopedia Dramatica subreddit. The full thread.

    Krom1991 is very clearly Oliver, many evidences, not merely MDS accusations.

    And there are more. First of all, “none of the accounts” was a lie. Secondly, Oliver focuses on possible errors. For example, MDS appears to believe that ED Kroms was Oliver. I can see why, but also saw a reason to suspect that this was not him. I may return to this.

    In tracking down the sources, I found the origin of the conflict with Mikemikev, it was documented by Mikemikev here. (archived). They blocked each other on Metapedia. The conflict documented on Metapedia Talk:Race realism continued over the years and is still continuing on RatWiki.

    archaic wrote:

    Once again, i’m not one of the accounts Michaeldsuarez has just posted, it just all lies. And note he provides no evidence I own a single of these accounts. Its just “you owned david1234!”, “you own apparition!”, or other accounts that aren’t mine. Heck I don’t even know what most these forums he’s posting. I’m meant to have posted on sites I’ve never heard of?

    The weirdest thing is suarez is trying to pin at least two Rationalwiki admin accounts onto me in 2012. That’s news to me. What a nutcase.

    Perhaps suarez is just trolling and doing this all “for the lolz”, either that or he’s the most deranged liar I’ve ever come across.

    Again, he focuses on errors, when he knows the truth, quite certainly, and why people would make these mistakes. On Wikipedia, Anglo Pyramidologist (Oliver) was confused with Liveintheforests (Darryl) and that carried over to RatWiki. David1234 and Apparitions were obvious Darryl RatWiki accounts.  Also Forests and DinoCrisis.

    RatWiki Krom is mentioned above, but did not start editing that site until 2015. Indeed, “news to” him. I have not found any RatWiki sysop account for Oliver that far back, so far. But MDS was not a “nutcase,” nor was he lying, and that kind of accusation — that an error is a lie — is typical for Smith socks.

    Most importantly, Oliver was indeed archaic, which was the first and most significant claim by MDS. To distract from that, Oliver raises a gigantic smokescreen.

    In what archaic posted, I find leads to Gust (prob. Darryl),  Tenchu2, blocked as Rome Viharo but very likely Oliver (who also used Tenchu on ED — contribs), Billy_the_kid (gives a pure Darryl argument), and then RatWiki Kroms, who, in spite of only three edits, was waving a big red flag: Oliver Smith. Kroms was blocked as Mikemikev by David Gerard. Gerard shows up again and again in the Smith oddysey, cited as if an omniscient authority. Two edits of Kroms were hidden. The first:

    Lysdexia is not Mikemikev, but Mikemikev linked to him here. This Lydexia person is called “autphag” from Kiwi farms. They are a autistic transsexual “race realist”, as weird and deranged as Mikemikev. Just google “autphag”. The funny thing is that Mikemikev and autphag were debating each other about who is better at “race realism” at Kiwi farms. lol. Everyone just laughs at them. They’re both outcasts within their own community. Lysdexia just uses most of Mikmikev’s arguments; neither are well read on science and just parrot the same fallacies.Kroms (talk) 16:24, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

    The second:

    Michaeldsuarez impersonating on socks

    Both PS2 and RaiderFan are the banned Rationalwiki user Michaeldsuarez. He goes around this site creating dozens of accounts impersonating me. Most the sockpuppets on Rome Viharo’s talk are also is. I only ever left one message there.Kroms (talk) 17:25, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

    RW Kroms was definitely Oliver. PS2 was also Oliver. RaiderFan was obviously not Oliver, but the claim of impersonation (because RaiderFan used a possible parody name) is pure Oliver Smith. (An account that is obviously not the “target” is not an impersonation, and RaiderFan was confronting Oliver, multiple times. That is why Kroms would say he was being impersonated, because of his TombRaiderFan account or possibly others.) RaiderFan was much later blocked by a Darryl Smith account.


    Self-admitted troll

    Great example of Smith trolling on Reddit, I see this morning.
    The thread is
    Abd ul-Rahman Lomax lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation is a failure

    started by u/RationalWikiuser with only one other trolling comment.

    The comment, account deleted by the time I saw it (this is done to make it difficult to track comments, there is no other sense to it)


    22 hours ago edited 22 hours ago (as of 17:10 UT)

    Laughable; you’re now boot-licking Dysklyver to try to get him to side with you against Smith.

    Actually, this troll has been doing quite a good job of influencing Dysklyver toward recognition. My goal with Dysklyver is to support him in realizing and expressing reality, not to get him to “side with me,” because reality has no sides. No boot-licking. I have disagreed with Dysklyver, but my work is not — as the trolls claim — about attacking those with whom I have some disagreement. It is all about finding consensus rooted in reality, the only place where genuine disagreements can be resolved, and trivial ones vanish.

    You did exactly the same thing with Rome Viharo. Originally you described Viharo as a “troll” and “loser”, yet when you realised you could use him against Smith, you suddenly started boot-licking him and did a 180 degrees turn over night, suddenly claiming he’s not a troll. Funny that.

    The trolls create fantasy stories that amuse them no end. Here, the troll is, as usual, displaying “guilty knowledge,” i.e., knowledge that would be very rare, except for someone who has intensively searched for my history. If that is done with them, they call it “stalking.” But I am not hiding, they are. So they unmask themselves by revealing these “facts.” What they report here is based on a fact, a comment, but the interpretation, they invented. The fact.

    The context: I was a RatWiki sysop, and wrote that in Ratspeak. It could be considered harsh, but that’s normal on RatWiki. I still stand by the analysis, Rome Viharo was ineffective on Wikipedia. I already recognized the pseudoskeptical faction that he confronted and that faction dominates on RatWiki. Because he was expressing a very unpopular point of view on RatWiki, with response being predictable, that was “trolling.”

    However, in the other direction, as I noted then, he had been abused and was being abused on RatWiki. Later, I learned much more about what had happened and who was involved. I continued to — and still continue to — disagree with some of Viharo’s conclusions, as being, at best, premature. The situation is a bit more complex, my opinion, than the simpler understanding he has shown. But he did not lie on his blog, and his clues led me to more direct evidence. None of this was about “boot-licking.”

    And no, you aren’t a journalist. (laughs)

    An anonymous troll imagines he can define the word and apply that as if fact, and have it make a difference for anyone. Journalist (Wikipedia). That is what I do, with researched, verifiable fact, and with editorial opinion, the two distinguished (if anyone asks). I am, as implied in what he was replying to, a “responsible journalist.” I can be called to account by my readers, and my name and reputation are at stake. This is radically different from anonymous editors and trolls.

    At what university did you study journalism, or what newspaper or online news website do you write for? You have zero credentials and own a crummy blog that you use to attack people you get in slap-fights over the internet.

    A small percentage of the blog space is devoted to this affair. Most of it — by far — relates to cold fusion, the subject of the blog, and reporting on cold fusion is where I have functioned the most as a journalist, explicitly supported by the public (and by private grants), see https://www.gofundme.com/cold-fusion-journalism, which does not show the larger contributions. I am not a “professional,” because I have never been paid for journalism; rather, I am an amateur, and the funding covers expenses. Relevant to the topic on this reddit, none of that funding has gone toward the filing fee for the lawsuit.

    I do use the blog for personal expression, pending the formation of an editorial board. It is all related to the cold fusion work, in some way, but it can be peripheral. For example, the attack on me on Wikiversity focused on deleting the cold fusion educational resource there, which had stood for a decade or so with no disruption at all. They lied in the deletion discussion. So, cold fusion related. And nobody supporting my work has complained. Only the people I supposedly get in slap-fights with, which is only Oliver and Darryl Smith, who create massive disruption and then blame it on others, like me. And like they are doing with their throwaway accounts on reddit.

    As to the central point, are bloggers journalists? Yes, according to a U.S. court. I have been given press credentials to attend a conference without paying a fee. I could have presented credentials in the U.S. Federal Court in Miami, but all I would have gained would have been the right to carry my phone into court, and I didn’t bother.

    At this point, coldfusioncommunity.net would not be considered “reliable source” for Wikipedia purposes, because there is no formal fact-checking editorial supervision. Not yet, anyway, but there is a rough fact-checking process, which is through public comments, which are invited, and anyone covered on the blog is allowed to present comments that will be featured as responses, if the original material is not “corrected.” Simply screaming on reddit that the blog is full of lies is not a correction. Specific links to specific information would be required.

    But I was saying that Dysklyver was a “reliable source” for my purposes, which is an editorial judgment I can make, until there is a review board in place (which I expect, eventually).

    Dysklyver did not provide any evidence for his claims. As for “highly respected”, lol.

    Dysklyver confirmed evidence and provided personal testimony, which is meaningless to the trolls, because to them, anonymous is equal to real-name. For “highly respected,” Dysklyver is a tech on RatWiki, basically he is trusted with the most sensitive of tools. He has done nothing that I have seen that is not in conformity with the stated purposes and traditions of RatWiki, and complaints about him, from accounts of the trolls, have gone nowhere.

    This claim of not “any evidence” is common with liars and purveyors of fake news. “There is no evidence.” when there is evidence, it’s obvious, and it has been shown and some of it is verifiable. Legally, personal testimony is evidence. In court, yes, to be admissible it must be attested, but informally, this is how society runs: on trust of personal testimony. But not to basement-dwelling trolls, who imagine that somehow by multiplying accounts, they increase credibility. It worked for them somewhere, so they repeat it.

    Trolls equate “evidence” with “proof,” which is bizarre for alleged skeptics. But it’s common, to be sure. All the time, people say “there is no evidence” when the reality is that there is evidence, but they do not agree with certain conclusions. Not distinguishing between evidence and conclusions is common for the naive. An ordinary person can testify in court according to what they have experienced, but not about their conclusions (unless they are qualified as an “expert witness” which is a huge can of worms.) The distinction is clear.

    That multiplication of accounts is classic sock puppetry. And it is completely obvious on the subreddits these trolls have been infesting.

    I do not wish to attack Dysk,


    but he’s a self-admitted troll

    This is interesting, but what Smith makes of it could be misleading. Fact, a subhead on Dysklyver’s blog:

    Cornish Lawyer, long time Wikipedian and Your Favourite Troll.

    In other trollsock ravings, Smith has claimed that when Oliver D. Smith admitted to suffering from schizophrenia, he was being sarcastic (which the context did not support). Here, was Dysklyver being sarcastic?

    Trolling is a specific kind of action, related to motivation. Trolling is not normally my habit, but there are places and times for it.

    I was prohibited from any editing related to cold fusion by a Wikipedia sysop. I filed an ArbCom case over that. In the middle of the case, the sysop claimed that I was still banned, and he could prove it. I had been voluntarily complying with the ban. This was an opportunity, a testosterone-crazed bully making a threat, inviting me to wave a red flag.

    So I formally withdrew from voluntary cooperation, and waited a day. No objections appeared. So I made a small, harmless edit to the cold fusion Talk page, pointing to a prior discussion in answer to a question that nobody had answered. This was not in the least disruptive, by any argument, other than “defiance of administrator.” I went to sleep.

    When I woke up and looked, all hell had broken loose. As was predictable, the admin had blocked me, I had been unblocked by an arbitrator, and immediate desysop was under discussion. That edit was the most efficient action I ever took on Wikipedia. Almost wordlessly, it demonstrated the problem I was confronting, and in the end, he — very popular in his faction! — was desysopped.

    Was that trolling? Yes. I took an action that I knew would provoke him. But is trolling always bad? Trolling can unmask pretenders. But that is quite unusual. More often what I do that is called trolling (especially by trolls) is that I tell the truth, or provide reasonable inference, with evidence, and there are those it angers, but my goal is not to anger them, it is to hew to reality. If reality angers them, that is their problem, not mine, though I’m still responsible for effects where I have power.

    Is Dysklyver a troll? I’ve seen very little, if any, to confirm that, but his actions on Wikipedia would be considered trolling to the mindless there, because they have no other way to imagine that they could understand his behavior. I’m not sure that I understand his behavior, but what I’ve seen so far is consistent with . . . I’ll call it genius. I suspect he will go far, if he doesn’t get himself killed. There is always that risk.

    and SJW/Antifa who uses photos on the internet pretending to be someone in a balaclava (certainly not normal), and he seems to lie a lot.

    OMG, not normal!!! What’s next? Unorthodox opinions? Where is the tar, and Mom, where is the pitchfork?

    No wonder the Smiths are so upset about “antinatalism” and “schizophrenia.” These are not normal!!! (I have extensive experience with schizophrenia, up close and personal. Yes, it is not normal, but it is possible to live with it, even to live well, high-functioning, if it is acknowledged. If it is denied, one is screwed, blued, and tatooed.)

    What looks like a lolcow biography, he wrote about himself, bragging:


    Bragging or just telling the truth. Is there a bragging emoticon so we can tell the difference?

    Considering he’s totally non-noticeable, this page shouldn’t have been written.

    According to what standards? Dysklyver claimed that this was written as a User page, and turned into an article. By whom? I don’t see a way to check history, but Everipedia does not seem to have notability standards. See the Wikipedia article. This is just irrelevant BS. Someone who has accomplished nothing thinks that listing accomplishments and activities is “lolcow.” Where it can be verified, what Dysklyver claims is true. The only thing questionable I see is “lawyer,” but that could have multiple interpretations.

    His blog bio has

    Arthur Kerensa, otherwise more popular known as Dysklyver, which means Encyclopedia in Cornish, is a perpetually bored lawyer from the United Kingdom. He works in the field of transnational corporate law, which means he is basically a clerk who fills out company incorporation forms for offshore entities.

    And most these claims about himself seem dubious and exaggerated (at best): a company director, lawyer and postgraduate student when he’s only recently turned 22? No evidence either presented for any of these claims.

    The collision between age and “lawyer” I noticed when I first looked at his user page information. However, anyone can be a company director at any age, there is no specific experience required, merely the consent of the shareholders (if it is a share company), or the owner or other authority.

    In any case, I did find evidence for “company director,” and this was given as a source for the Everipedia article, so Smith was just blowing smoke. He is the only officer and declared shareholder of the company, formed last year, and currently subject to a notice that the company will be struck from the register if no response is received by May 19, 2019. So if he cares about the company, he’ll respond, and if not, not. And none of this is really relevant. At age 21 or 22, he was a director. Of his own company, to be sure. And anyone could be that by filing the appropriate forms and paying the fees. I suspect that the planned business did not work out. That’s all. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Now, if he made a big deal out of this, i.e., “you should invest in me because I am a Company Director,” well, that would be puffery and anyone who falls for that is an idiot. I’m a company (nonprofit) director, also, the equivalent here, and big whoop! What matters is the actual work done. I have also formed a number of companies over the years, and I’ve sat on a significant, active nonprofit board. I would mention, in some bios, the relevant activity, not in others.

    “Lawyer” could have various meanings. He claims to be doing the work of a lawyer, which would be a basic meaning. It could also be puffery. If it were important, I’d ask him. It is not important!

    What Smith is doing is what he always does: look for anything that can be asserted to make the person seem a troll, a liar, and generally disreputable. It’s not working! Dysklyver is staff at Wikilivres, which is the highest privilege level. Whatever role he needs, he can create for himself. It’s like tech on RationalWiki, so Smith is attacking a RatWiki user with the highest privilege level, as to actual tools. Why? What does he hope to accomplish?

    (Trolling often makes no sense, and sometimes trolls get away with it because ordinarily people can’t imagine the mind of a troll.)

    As to post-graduate student, I entered Cal Tech at 17, so if I had simply attended for four years, I’d have graduated at 21 and the next step would have been post-graduate study. So Dysklyver at 22 is not terribly unusual.

    I skipped a grade and a half when I was young, long story. I had only turned 17 a few months before being a freshman at Tech. Smith has his head wedged.

    Based on log-in times and his activity, Arthur is almost certainly unemployed. He also edits RationalWiki well into the night and responds on Reddit at 3 to 4 am (UK time); he lives in Cornwall, England.

    How does this troll know “log-in times”? That information is generally not public. One could tell from raw access logs, but Smith has no access to those. Edit activity can be seen.

    I have not looked at Dysklyver edit timing. It is a piece of work to do it properly. This is irrelevant. One person may make edits at odd times with it being no particular burden, another, the same timing could be difficult. Some people wake up in the middle of the night and edit some. This can vary from day to day. One would need to look at timing in detail to make any sense of it, and there is no sense to spending the time required.

    This is all an attempt to insinuate something “bad” about Dysklyver. To put this in perspective, the only information we have about timing and work from the Smith brothers is what I’ve put together by identifying accounts and compiling the information from contributions and logs. Just looking at a contributions display can be misleading and is not useful for study over a period of years, which I have done with some Smith activity. And then one sees far more interesting information.

    It is easy to track Dysklyver because he uses few accounts. It is much more complex to track the trolls, and especially these trollsocks, throwaway accounts.

    Dysklyver claims to have a job. However, he might have breaks from a job, or the situation may have changed. All of this is meaningless to the core issue: is his testimony as to fact within his personal knowledge reliable? From, now, experience in (limited) direct communication with him, and observation of his work (much more extensive), my conclusion is, yes, he is a reliable source for reporting probable fact, for which “proof” is not required.

    Even if anonymous trolls attack him with many accounts and claims. And those claims generally are laced with lies, where they can be verified. (And what Dysklyver has claimed without “proof,” I also have claimed, based on what I have seen myself. So that is two real people confirming each other, though we disagreed — perhaps — on interpretation — and since copies can be seen of the relevant pages, anyone could judge for themselves. The trolls were claiming that the pages were made up, did not exist, etc. or were created by impersonators, which was impossible for one of them, and, my opinion, unlikely for the other, and the pages converged on the issue in question.

    These trolls lie. Have I mentioned that?

    I always check log in times and edits on RationalWiki. Like Mikemikev, Arthur is online RW all day and through the night to 4 am. There’s no way these trolls do a real days work, they’re online almost 24/7.

    Again, how does he check “log in times”? If there is something I’ve been missing all these years, I’d love to know!

    (Even if log in time could be known, one can be logged in and paying no attention unless something pops up. Edit activity establishes that one has pressed a button. I used to study edit records for suspected sock masters who were operating “assisted editing tools.” The user would have the tool running and would press an accept button, several times a minute, for hours on end. I used to think, “OMG! What kind of person does this for free?”)

    Dysklyver is not a troll, that’s obvious, not in the ordinary meaning. But the one accusing him of trolling is a troll, clearly and without doubt. The socking on reddit only makes sense as trolling.

    As to Mikemikev, that’s entirely a different issue, and there is no comparison between Mikemikev and Dysklyver, the only similarity being that, now, Smith is starting to be obsessed with Dysklyver, whereas he has been obsessed with Mikemikev for years.

    This is standard for the Smiths. Anyone who interferes with their agenda, by commenting on the obvious or documenting it, becomes their enemy, to be attacked with fire.

    It does not matter if it is completely irrelevant in context. They will use every opportunity, and where they have created an attack article, they will link to it early and often.

    (Remember, there are two Smiths, with differing personalities to some degree, much confusion has arisen over this. Most sock puppetry only involves one person, Smith socking must be handled differently.)


    Claims of libel and harassment

    [deleted] 5 hours ago

    It is being claimed on the internet that I have libelled them. That’s fun.

    At least 4 individuals, independently said you harassed them by email. Various individuals have also complained your blog contains defamation and malicious falsehoods written about them. You’ve also used this Reddit section to further harass one of these individuals by repeating a defamatory claim they are a schizophrenic, despite them pointing out they’re not and asking you to cease and desist writing this libel. Enjoy losing your lawsuit; I hope the WMF counter-sue.

    “4 individuals, independently.” I know three possibilities. None of these were harassment.

    • Oliver D. Smith claimed I harassed him by email, but I published our entire correspondence, and it shows no harassment. He didn’t like some of what I wrote to him, but the correspondence was begun by him and he continued it voluntarily.

    The Talk page archive for my RatWiki article begins with a deception: I did not have any correspondence with Debunking spiritualism, which was Darryl L. Smith (who does not disclose that he wrote the article in the first place as retaliation). The email was all with his brother, Oliver D. Smith. And then Oliver, as Agent47, claimed I had harassed him, quoting a mail, which, in context was not harassment at all. And he lies about not having a brother editing RatWiki. Straight, bald-faced lie, to the RatWiki community. But he hates that community, has admitted to using it as a platform. Any notice he had previously claimed he was not editing RatWiki any more. He’s claimed that many times, and proceeded to edit more.

    Perhaps he was lying to me, and in many other places about the brother. Perhaps anything. Once someone shows they lie like this, nothing they say can be trusted, even if accompanied by evidence, because they can develop skill in deception based on how evidence is presented. But if I responded to him based on a lie, his passing that on without disclosing what I was responding to would be more deception.

    • Joshua P. Schroeder claimed I harassed him by email. I published that email as well, as I recall. It was about getting material about him taken down. I had material on my blog, I had taken down, and I arranged to get other material on a different web site taken down, I was informing him that the trolls had archived those (in order to use it on RatWiki as an allegation of harassment) and the correspondence was voluntary and JSP did not object to it. However, he was working with the Smith brothers. This was not independent, and that was, in fact, part of a campaign of harassment. The original email to JPS was through the WMF mail facility, and if that had been harassment, it could have been a basis for the WMF ban.

    However, there may also have been impersonation mails.

    •   John Vidale, from an image posted on Encyclopedia Dramatica, apparently did not like being notified that his review of a book on the sociology of cold fusion was the subject of a post on this blog: fantasy-rejects-itself/. I responded to that previously at fantasy-rejects-itself/#Update If anything about that post was offensive or incorrect, he remains welcome to correct it. It is not harassment for a blogger to notify someone they have been mentioned in a post. Period.

    None of the above were harassment.

    Various individuals have also complained your blog contains defamation and malicious falsehoods written about them.

    Oliver and Darryl Smith complain that when evidence about their history is presented. They pretend that there are many people being “maligned.” They claimed for quite some time that there were no brothers editing RatWiki, for example, that there were no impersonations, that was all a crazy conspiracy theory. But the flood of throwaway accounts on Reddit in the last few days is simply another example in a long history of this behavior. Eventually, Oliver Smith admitted to being accounts that he had denied, for example, he denied being Octo (when it was obvious). Were it a mere denial of being a sock, not so offensive. But using it as an accusation of insanity? Here, Oliver listed articles he had created (already identified by me, generally). Edward Dutton was created by Octo. So he was lying, lying, lying. And that is one example among very many.

    The sad thing here is that Oliver is not the most vicious of the brothers. And he is probably not behind all those throwaway socks. He is probably and fairly simply, insane. And, of course, that I say that becomes yet another accusation of defamation.

    You’ve also used this Reddit section to further harass one of these individuals by repeating a defamatory claim they are a schizophrenic, despite them pointing out they’re not and asking you to cease and desist writing this libel.

    Nobody obligated the Smith brothers to read those sections, and the section this was posted in is about my lawsuit against the WMF. Trollsocks poured in and I responded. So I am called a harasser? Now, what did I actually write? I don’t rely on my memory, and at my age that can be frikkin unreliable, especially for accurate detail. What I wrote on that page:

    Oliver also claimed to be schizophrenic. 

    I did not claim that he was a schizophrenic. This is common for the Smith trolls. They have no sense of accuracy, it is all about reaction and blame. I do not know that Oliver is a schizophrenic, what I know is this edit by Atlantid, which was admittedly him.

    These trolls raise a farrago of deceptive “facts” and arguments, and responding to all of them will take more time than I have.

    If anyone has questions, comments are open here. They may be left anonymously, and if one wants private communication, leave a valid email address and ask for the comment to be deleted. This will be respected, with one caveat:

    Trolls will be roasted in butter and served with sour cream as snacks. Not kosher but I’m not Jewish. Skeptics and criticism is welcome, and corrections are specifically invited.



    List of lies and smears

    This is from a Reddit comment on the WikiInAction subreddit, topic
    Globally banned Wikipedia user Arthur Kerensa Dysklyver
    posted by [deleted]
    Abdlomaxisaliar 2 days ago as of 8:44 UT 4/18/2019

    You keep complaining about being attacked but spend your life doing it to others, including Smith:

    I am using this as an opportunity to go over the tactics used by Darryl L. Smith. There are two Smiths, and they use confusion over that to generate smoke to cover up what they do. In the articles they write, they will take a single example, sometimes from the distant past, and conflate it into a pattern of behavior. I first saw this rhetorical tactic on Wikipedia. A single instance of possible error in copyright was conflated, in accusations to “places copyright violations in articles.” Later examination found no evidence of that, and the original copyvio was material she found in a sandbox and asked an admin about. In other words, totally innocent, but smeared, and it worked. As part of my effort to clean that up, I had my first real block on Wikipedia. All later considered a mistake. But, of course, an entry in the block log! Which later, could be used as proof of “attacks administrators,” etc.

    I don’t “complain” about being attacked. That’s how trolls think, and “complainer” is in juvenile culture a moral failure. Complainers don’t simply describe what happened, but “whine” about it. (And, in fact, there are whiners, who disempower themselves. Describing what happens, however, is a path to power, even from major traumatic events.)

    Abd’s list of lies and smears

    This is not Abd’s list, it is Abdlomaxisaliar‘s list. Let’s see what is alleged.

    False claim Smith is somehow an antinatalist, basing his source on a tongue-in-cheek comment.

    False according to an anonymous troll. What I wrote was sourced, and this troll acknowledges that. “Basing his source” is redundant. The claim was a comment by Oliver Smith that he was an anti-natalist, in a context where (1) it was definitely him, there is no question, (2) he was denying that he had children — because some troll had commented that I was “attacking someone with children,” — and added he was an antinatalist and found my having seven children “disgusting.” Now if that is not evidence that Oliver is an antinatalist, what would be? I actually can’t think of stronger evidence. But there is more of it, I found two places where biographies written by Smith made the claim. One was a deleted bio on RationalWiki that Oliver later claimed was written by Mikemikev, though that is very unlikely from internal evidence that the other edits of the author, all of which I have covered. The other was an autobography written on the Wiki RationalWikiarchives, also called RationalWikiWiki, by Smith. A Smith troll sock claimed that I had probably written that. But I found that the biol had been archived 11 times over a month. If it had been written by an impersonator, the Rats would have immediately whacked it. Only the last version might be suspected in that way, and I suspect that Oliver’s brother probably deleted it, because it named him, whereas the earlier versions did not. Oliver is schizophrenic and unstable and does all kinds of things that make no sense. It clearly claims that he is antinatalist. And those biographies reflect Oliver’s expressed positions on many topices over the years. They are not what enemies of Smith would write, they are full of relatively sophisticated self-rationalization or explanation.

    And this doesn’t matter; Smith brothers are looking for any accusation they can make and if they think they can make something look like a lie, they will assert it as proof. With anonymous accounts, as on Reddit, they don’t care if it is blatantly preposterous. Some of it may stick, they have figured that out. And then they will accuse another enemy, or the same, of being behind those trollsocks, and, again, they have found that some will believe this.

    Not a lie and not actually a smear.

    False and potentially libellous claim that Smith is or was a fascist. No evidence provided. After Smith pointed out Abd was lying, Abd completely changed the definition of fascist he was using to his own obscure definition.

    “No evidence provided” is ignorant or a lie, and because this troll has obviously read much, probably a lie. Oliver seemed to believe that a way to convince someone that they had erred was to accuse them of “lying,” and this little piece admits that. In response to Oliver’s claims, I did a study of Oliver’s Atlantid activity. Most of it has been deleted, apparently, but enough remains to see certain things.


    Oliver worked on Metapedia for a year, mostly as a sysop. From Wikipedia, the lead:

    Metapedia is an online wiki-based encyclopedia which contains authoritarian far-right, white nationalist, white supremacist, antisemitic, Holocaust denial, and neo-Nazi points of view.

    That, by the way, would not prove “fascist,” in itself. But one might understand such an idea. However, from a number of contexts (many having nothing to do with the Smiths, I have started to use a generic definition of fascism that does not confine itself to “right-wing fascism,” rather it refers to collectivist authoritarianism, which exists in tension with freedom and diversity. This is a far more useful definition, but, then, all of us can fall into fascism of this kind. And that is precisely why it is more useful. I derived the definition I’m using from reading Mussolini, who coined the word and defined it in a widely-reproduced article, which in various versions assigned it as right-wing, left-wing, or left that out. The RationalWiki article on Fascism does approach this issue, but then falls entirely into leftist apologia and confusion.

    merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism second meaning:

    a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control

    RationalWiki is, overall, fascist in the sense I have been using the term. And, remember, “fascist” does not mean “wrong.” Those who react, knee-jerk, to a natural polarity will delude themselves and project error onto others who merely describe reality. Examples abound.

    Bottom line, Oliver was working for the improvement of an extreme right-wing, antisemitic, neo-Nazi wiki, and was, as a sysop, authoritarian, blocking contrary opinion that he thought supported anti-racism. That’s shown in the edit histories.

    Not a lie and not actually a smear — and not obscure.

    False and potentially libellous claim that Smith is or was an anti-Semite.

    I covered this in the Atlantid study. I am not a mind-reader, but Oliver followed Metapedia practice in specially identifying Jewish scientists, as an example, with a Star of David symbol, clearly serving the project’s anti-semitism. That’s enough to legitimate the claim of antisemitism. Oliver remained and remains free to deny it, but it is not likely to be meaningful unless he clearly repudiates what he did. I have never claimed anti-semitism as his current state, I have seen no recent evidence. Smith’s article go back many years, scraping up anything they can find that looks bad, and then assert the implications of that as the present and ongoing state of their target. Examples abound. Turnabout is fair play, but I have never gone that far.

    Defamation Smith suffers from schizophrenia, basing his source on Mikemikev’s impersonations and trolling of Smith.

    That is a gross error and deception, i.e., the schizophrenia claim is not based on Mikemikev’s claims. Rather, this edit, Oliver’s last on Metapedia.

    Yes Mike I also suffer from schizophrenia. I am now bettering my health,renouncing my former views and association with Metapedia, this is my final message here. I’ve blocked my own account and changed the pass,so i won’t be able to log back in. Atlantid 03:08, 6 December 2013 (CET)

    There is more, but that’s really enough. I am not reactive to “schizophrenia,” I know a lot about it. I had a paranoid schizophrenic mother. It’s just a condition and it is possible to be high-functioning with it, but it is probably necessary to hew to total honesty, and for Oliver to be involved in what he gets involved in is probably very poor for his health.

    Not a lie and not a smear.

    Lying about Smith’s edits about race on Metapedia. Smith clearly criticised hereditarianism, but Abd lies on his blog and claims Smith supported hereditarianism – a demonstrably false and ridiculous claim.

    This can get really complex. Oliver is obsessed about this particular issue. I went over this on the Atlantid page. Does it matter what Smith supported then? “Hereditarian” is not understood by most people, but the current politically correct view is “environmentalism,” this is about intelligence, and the usual fracas is over intelligence test results. It’s a colossal mess, and when I look at the science and the debates, my reaction is more or less “a pox on both your houses,” because extreme views get enshrined and linked with each other, retarding synthesis, which is where we can approach reality. In any case, this is from the Atlantid study page:

    first termed Oliver “hereditarian” because of his comment when he blocked a user without warning, merely for “(Inserting false information: vandalism on the Gypsy page (the usual liberal nonsense they have lower IQ because of social-economic conditions).” The edit. By his response, Oliver was negating “environmentalism,” in a way that leaves only hereditarianism in place. I see no excuse, and he does not attempt to provide an explanation. This was January, 2013. If he revised his views later, did he go back and unblock Rose and apologize? He had admin until November 27, 2013. 

    This discussion went on. Again, since Oliver may have changed his views (he claims that). That he criticized hereditarianism (perhaps he did) would not negate that he “supported” it somewhere else. The Smith writing this has a cartoon view of people, possibly including himself.

    And so what? Who cares if Oliver supported hereditarianism years ago? It does become relevant if he viciously attacks others for hereditarian views. “Hereditarian” is very weak as a smear, unless it asserts present position in certain contexts.” It is obvious that there is a degree to which intelligence is hereditary, and a degree to which it is affected by environmental conditions, so these  “isms” represent extremes, both errors if the opposite is denied.

    Not a lie and not a smear.

    Lying about Smith being an asexual. No evidence presented, just trolling on Encyclopedia Dramatica.

    Well, no. What was placed on ED came from RatWiki, and can be seen by any sysop. Calling this “no evidence” is a lie. I did not call him “asexual,” as I recall, though he called himself that, made a point of it. He called himself “antinatalist” in his email to me, that’s evidence, and Oliver wrote a bio of himself, as “Oliver D Smith”, who was active on the Wikia with that name, well-known to RatWikians (“Rats”). When I pointed to that on Reddit, a Smith troll claimed that I had made that page up, but that Wikia was closely monitored by Rats and Oliver, and the archive.is copy was archived 11 times over a month. This was authentic, period. But the Smiths lie to cover up their lies, and lie again to accuse others of impersonating them and whatever they think of, without any shame.

    Quite the same as the RatWiki bio, the RWW bio directly claims “antinatalist” and “asexual.”

    Smith identifies as Grey-A, somewhere between asexual and heterosexual. He has never been in a relationship and is sexually abstinent. He is pro-LGBTQIA rights, but doesn’t like the modern subcultures of these groups. Smith is an antinatalist and is voluntary childfree; he began writing a book on antinatalism a few years back and his antinatalist views are best summarised by David Benatar, “The Misanthropic Argument for Antinatalism”. His politics are based on any measure to stop/reverse population growth and are neither strictly left nor right wing.

    Who cares about this unfortunate’s sexuality? It has nothing to do with the problem, massive defamation. Oliver has created deceptive articles on RatWiki and has then convinced major media to reprint the libels, probably because of his skillful use of shallow impressions, i.e,. if a source appears to support a claim if one squints, it can work with a shallow, deadline-pressed journalist. He’s being sued for this (not by me).

    Not a lie and not a smear.

    False claim Smith is John66 on RationalWiki. No evidence presented, a baseless allegation.

    Different Smith. This would be Darryl L. Smith. A pile of evidence has been presented, starting with what is called the “duck test” on Wikipedia. Focus, interests. Debunking spiritualism was Darryl Smith, at the same time as ODS was Oliver. (DS is merely a hint!). As DS shut down activity on RatWiki, Skeptic from Britain fired up on Wikipedia, with a new interest: “food woo” and related medical topics. As that was heating up, an account was started with a few edits on RatWiki, John66. SfB was very active, providing massive edits for studying edit timing. The edits dovetail with Debunking spiritualism on one end and John66 on the other.

    But the strongest evidence is the duck test. To call the allegation “baseless” is a lie. Could I be wrong? Sure, but if John66 is not abusive, why would this be a “smear”? It would merely be a suspected sock puppet, basis obvious for anyone who looks. (They claim that the new interests prove that the account is different. No, it shows a new interest, that was connected in places with the old ones.)

    Not a lie and not a smear.

    False claim on Abd’s blog Smith is an Antifa or supports Antifa. This lie was copied from Mikemikev without fact-checking. Smith has never supported Antifa and has criticised that organisation as terrorist.

    I don’t have the idea that Oliver Smith is “an antifa,” which has come to mean a specific group. However, he has fed antifa propaganda, and his work mostly has focused on attacking alleged racists and neo-Nazis. So he might be considered antifa in that way. Where was this alleged “false claim”?

    There are lists of suspected sock puppets on this blog. A suspected sock is not an accusation that one is what the name implies. However, I have not listed any suspicion or conclusion based on Mikemikev. That’s been a common accusation, and I can testify that it is false. I have seen information from Mikemikev that I have checked and investigated. If it holds up, I have then reported it on my own authority and standing on my own reputation and responsibility. And if any of these are incorrect, and especially if they cause harm to anyone, they are easy to correct. But the Smiths don’t correct these things, rather they cry “Lies!” and are not specific. Trolls!

    However, I was not satisfied, so I searched for “antifa” on my blog. I found only that I had mentioned an account in connection with Emil Kirkegaard. This account, Antifa Ireland, repeated the standard Oliver propaganda about Kirkegaard. (“child rape apologist,” which was a lie. And why that was kept in the article says volumes about wiki unreliability.

    There was only one edit. The context was one where impersonation socking (impersonating Kirkegaard) was appearing. At that point the Rats had no clue who Welliver was, and his anti-Kirkegaard arguments were being rejected, so the sock appears to reject the community position. There is not enough evidence to know for sure who Antifa Ireland was, but I’d bet on a Smith brother, it could be either one.

    Stating a suspicion based on evidence like that is routine, and not defamation. It’s allowed on Wikipedia, not considered uncivil, or example, and if wrong, so what?

    Countless false identifications of Smith’s accounts on RationalWiki, Wikipedia and other websites.

    This troll is promoting confusion. There are two Smiths, with distinct interests and behaviors. Let’s start with Wikipedia. I did not name “Smith” for a long time, but it was well-known. I started with a set of socks that had impersonated a user, someone interested in parapsychology. As a result of the impersonations on Wikipedia, he was followed to Wikiversity and attacked. He was blocked and his work was deleted. The work was harmless, a study of sources, which Wikiversity was for. Eventually, I became aware of this and looked. At first I chided him for socking on Wikipedia. He said, “Yes, I was X and Y, but not those disruptive accounts.” And I looked and there were clear differences. X and Y were socking, all right, but not disruptively. The others were trolling, blatantly and seeking to be blocked and waving a big flag with the name of this user.

    So basic lesson for anyone concerned with socking on wikis and elsewhere. Real socks generally hide their identity. Ones that do not are unusual, and might need to be treated differently. If they are disruptive, block them, of course. But if they wave the X flag, do not assume they are X. They may be an enemy of X. And if an SPA files checkuser on these “X” trolls, be sure to include that SPA in the checkuser investigation. If that had been done on Wikipedia, a lot of trouble would have been avoided.

    In any case, when I saw this, I went to meta and requested checkuser, since this had gone cross-wiki. And bingo! complainants on Wikipedia and Wikiversity and the troll socks, all the same user. So I started to write an essay on SPA trolls, and listed these socks. And piles of troll socks appeared. They say that you know you are over the target when the flak gets heavy. I kept reporting the socks to stewards. And then I was accused of being on a vendetta  against “skeptics,” with private complaints being obvious, and all that led to a global ban. Someone was protecting these attack dogs, I suspect, or they had merely fooled many, including the WikiMedia Foundation.

    One of the socks identified had edited Commons and a RatWiki user had used the image immediately. That was my first connection between this mess and RatWiki. Someone who knew Oliver Smith very well dropped me a note on my Talk page by IP that he was sending me email, and my Talk page was promptly attacked. Someone was watching everything closely and reacting very strongly. I did not announce “Smith” until much later, and “Oliver D. Smith” has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. But that was not the one who had impersonated originally. Very different interests were involved (though there were connections, Oliver Smith had used the name of that original target to start an article on RatWiki — later admitted, and claimed “not impersonation because spelled differently.” It was trolling. The person was allegedly a racist. (In fact, he had been racist and had renounced that.)

    Many, many Oliver Smith accounts eventually acknowledged identity. Darryl L. Smith, on the other hand, has never, to my knowledge, admitted his accounts, even though some are quite obvious and widely known. So the furious attack on my work is likely coming from him, and I see little sign of Oliver involvement. Oliver is still trying to edit RatWiki and most recently is being blocked as “Smith.” That is a huge shift.

    In any identification of hundreds of socks, as exists on this blog, there are likely some errors. Correction (or contrary claims) have always been welcome, but are almost never presented. Instead, they cry “Lies,” and have been making that claim since I first started collecting evidence. Pages that were pure evidence without conclusions were called “Lies.”

    That’s a clue.

    Not lies and not smears.

    And the list goes on…

    If anyone wants clarification, ask in comments on this page. All comments must be approved, so I see all of them. If a comment asks for it, it can be deleted. However, trolls will be roasted and served for lunch, they make excellent low-carb snacks. Don’t worry, honest disagreement and criticism is not trolling. Accusations by real people, responsible for what they write, is also unlikely to be trolling. Skeptics are welcome here, always have been. Skepticism is, in fact, essential to science. Pseudoskepticism is poisonous, but some degree of it is very common. As are racism and fascism. To move beyond these things, we need clear communication, not condemnation and hatred.