There are many accounts that will be added, but to start this page:
Identified or suspected Oliver Smith socks on RationalWiki:
Some accounts or IP addresses listed here may be impersonations, there are signs of that. Because Oliver Smith does not have an “official” account commenting (which would need to be off-wiki, and proven to be him by, for example, using the known Oliver Smith email) it is difficult to distinguish real from fake, but accounts reasonably believed to be Oliver — and claiming it — are denying being the IP trolls. It’s plausible. The impersonations take material that looks like Oliver material, and spam it. That is what was done on RatWiki with me.
- Created page attacking Wyatt in BjornStronginthearm [archived]
- Trolled Dysklyver with ARTHUR_KERENSA_UNMASKED using File:Small_man.png, image of a midget.
- Trollsocks are suspected of being impersonations. Against this idea is that Oliver, who could communicate authentically, does not disavow them promptly. Mikemikev, the most likely impersonator, would be unlikely to attack Wyatt. “Unlikely” does not mean “impossible.
- The breadcrumbs led me to a Smith sock on Stormfront. Pure Smith. Nobody else would consider “finding 15-year old girls attractive” to be “self-confessed pedophilia.” The guy has no life, no idea of what normal sexuality is like, at almost 30. That was Mikemikev and he also said he wouldn’t touch them because he has ethics. Precisely — we hope. That, however, depends on context, in some cultures a sexually mature person is eligible for marriage, age is irrelevant. They don’t care about age. This has nothing to do with a paraphilia. Mike wasn’t even confessing a paraphilia (it would be ephebophilia, if it were exclusive attraction). The “common usage” of pedophilia can be a denial of normal sexuality, which is weird, but it happens. “Attraction” is normal, but it is also normal not to mention it. The source cited by Wikipedia (my emphasis):
Q. Generally when you read or hear in the news about “pedophilia,” aren’t the media using the term to refer to anyone who is a minor?
A. Yes. Generally, people use the term “pedophilia” to include ephebophilia. Most men can find adolescents attractive sexually, although, of course, that doesn’t mean they’re going to act on it.
- Looking for what is mentioned, evidence that Wyatt was BjornStronginthearm. I find this post that made the claim without evidence, 14 Nov 2018. User SythonFilter, started this thread, Smith flags: UK and BNP and, down the page, UKIP. Sythonfilter is called “Matthew Collins” and “Francis.” Maybe, maybe not. Nationalist. So this really could be Oliver. Active 6/8/2016 until 7/2/2016, 69 posts. Upplysning tagged SythonFilter as Oliver (i.e., Atlantid), confirmed by BjornStronginthearm in a reply.
- Another probable Oliver Smith sock on Stormfront: AngloCornish, joined in 2006, only other creator of threads on Rightpedia. BjornStronginthearm tagged AngloCornish as Oliver in 2017.
- It does appear plausible that BjornStronginthearm is Wyatt of Rightpedia, but the intense interest is Oliver obsession, long-term.
- and all this led me to BillConservative on Conservapedia, creator of the Rightpedia article there, then edited by a series of Smith impersonation trollsocks (and others). Troyer was probably Oliver as well, crowing about Rightpedia being taken down.
- Unblockabdnow, from timing, was obviously created to amplify the impression that Abominable was me. Darryl does stuff like this. I rather doubt Mikemikev would do it.
Mr D/EK you are very friendly with Mr A-B-D and he told you on discord to remove it (I have seen your discord chats with A-B-D). Mr A-B-D defends the alt-right and he is close friend of Kirkegaard, so he wants criticisms of Kirkegaard removed. Kirkegaard wants to legalize incest and A-B-D is embarrassed about this because he has defended Kirkegaard for the last year, so he wants Kirkegaard’s blog post hidden. Mr A-B-D also blogged about IPs editing this article which he incorrectly accuses being one person. Stop the pretending, this is all A-B-D’s doing, nobody else. You did not just randomly log in here and not like an edit, LOL. But sure the autism stuff should be deleted but the incest and rape comments should all be put back. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:50, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Emil Kirkegaard wants to legalize incest and he thinks incest is perfectly morally acceptable in a sexual relationship – that is irrational and wrong. You yourself (D) a male pretend to be EK a female over the internet, and according to users on a forum that have looked into your activities you are a trying to be transsexual and are very confused about your sexuality so maybe you support incest. But 99% of people in the world do not support it. It should not be “legalized” or promoted as a good thing. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:40, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
(@David Gerard , (@Bongolian , (@Cosmikdebris , (@John66 , (@LeftyGreenMario , (@Spud what do you think? 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:00, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Other mods can perhaps intervene. EK is totally unhinged. This isn’t the first time they’ve falsely accused someone of an “ism” or “phobia”.Loch (talk) 19:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I’m not the IP editors. IP-editing doesn’t fit my behaviour at all; I’ve only used accounts. Unless you’re claiming my behaviour has suddenly changed to IP editing randomly after more than 7 years, why? I claimed you’re unhinged because you falsely accuse people of “isms” & “phobias”. There is no “ableism” in my edit(s), elsewhere you also falsely accused me of “transphobia”. I can only take that as a sign you’re a compulsive liar since nowhere have I ever written anything about transexuals on the internet, so how am I a transphobe? You make up total BS about people.Sea (talk) 20:25, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
EK/D are both the same person on this website (although D pretended to have quit). EK is very friendly with A-B-D and regularly talks to him everyday on multiple discords. A-B-D is in regular communication with Kirkegaard. A-B-D converted EK to his side because they were both globally banned on Wikipedia. A-B-D is having a negative influence here and gives in to A-B-D’s demands. EK/D should be cooped. (@David Gerard, Make it happen. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I use one Discord server only and D (Arthur Kerensa) is not active there every day. I occasionally receive email from Kirkegaard, perhaps every few months, but he did not inform me of the editing in question. D did retire, has no contributions or logged actions since then. (EK removed sysoprevoke he had created and restored his rights, but there has been no explanation of this that I’ve seen.) I don’t make demands, and did not request action. The IP says as if fact what he does not know, which is like lying.
D/EK – Abd was originally attacking you, he even created a blog post monitoring your activities. You only became friends with him around June 2019 because you are both globally banned on Wikipedia and you support his lolsuit against the WMF (you regularly post on wikipediocracy in regard to Abd’s lolsuit which you seem to support). Your edits on his RW article about the alt-right cult were made on 11 April 2019, long before you became friendly with him. And no, you wouldn’t try and remove that now because David Gerard does not like A-b-d so you would not try and white-wash criticisms from his article, it would like suspicious for you. A-b-d has been defending you on Reddit and on his blog, and on Reddit you keep defending him. I also don’t see why you have to pretend to be female on here or use two accounts D and EK. We all know who you are. As for discord logs, I have screenshots and I could easily email RW staff that reveal you and A-B-D regularly communicate and support each others agendas. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:31, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I’m not at all interested in the Abd drama and some of these Ips flooding this page could be Michael Coombs that are derailing the actual dispute. A sysop should just restore the incest and rape posts — we all actually know the real reason those were removed.Giant (talk) 20:40, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Just to point out the other IPS are not me. I added the original Kirkegaard incest blog post where he said he wants to legalize incest, a few days ago. It is relevant. Can a mod restore the said content. Thanks. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
D/EK same person
D/EK on RationalWiki are both the same person in real life, it is the same guy who likes to pretend to be female. He was globally banned on Wikipedia using D and EK accounts traced to the same IP. D has also admitted to being EK on Reddit. This person EK is now friendly with a-b-d and communicates with him on the Wikipediocracy discord, where a-b-d tells him to remove criticisms from certain article. EK even made a-b-d an admin on that discord. They are also on an email chain list together. EK needs to be cooped. His has a secret agenda and is damaging this website in various discord chats. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 22:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
(Above spammed to 7 user talk pages, probably with the same message as put on David Gerard talk a few minutes earlier (suppressed by DG).
About my communication with D (Dysklyver, Arthur Kerensa) and EK (Emblyn Kerensa?)
I have never told them what to do on RatWiki. They sometimes read this blog and I have linked to it at times. I don’t personally care what is in the Kirkegaard article, other than having noted in the past that the accusations there are grossly distorted. But for my own purposes, it’s better that the defamation be there, it strengthens Kirkegaard’s case against Oliver Smith. But it is better for RatWiki that ungrounded defamatory material be removed, and I presume that any action taken by D or EK is according to their perception of benefit to that project and community. They are highly trusted there, and keeping a trust is what I have come to expect from them.
I am not on any email list with either of them. I never attacked Dysklyver, but documented him on this page. Simple reporting of open fact, to the Smiths, is “attack.” In any case, Dyslyver saw that page and commented, and that was the beginning of our communication. He is not globally banned by the WMF, nor is EK. There is a lock, but a lock is not a ban. He would be free to create a new account. EK commented on Wikipediocracy in the thread on my lawsuit; as I recall, we had no communication before then. Oliver then attacked EK with the socking claim, which sealed his ban from RatWiki.
- I was invited to join the Wikipediocracy Discord, and that is where I was given mod status. Nice people!
Why were legitimate edits removed from Emil Kirkegaard article? see for example 188.8.131.52 that added an incest and rape post to controversies. Questioner (talk) 18:01, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
You should ask the person who made the removal (@EK) on the talk page for that article first (Talk:Emil Kirkegaard). Bongolian (talk) 18:06, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Questioner – EK/D are both the same person. He has become friendly with a-b-d on the Wikipediocracy discord and a-b-d is friends with Kirkegaard and told EK/D to remove it (all three of them are banned on Wikipedia). No legit reason to remove that material. It is a-b-d’s doing. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 18:11, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Yea I noticed Abd’s blog wrongly claims (without any evidence) 141.98 is Smith. Abd on discord then got EK to remove it. However those IP edits aren’t by Smith. Questioner (talk) 18:16, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Emil Kirkegaard talk-page is locked. IP/S and new users cannot edit there. A-b-d is doing a lot of damage to RationalWiki off-site, people should not side with him here or give in to his demands, he has EK now on his side. [ping]David Gerard – EK/D is now very friendly with A-b-d and both of them communicate with Kirkegaard, you need to be careful about this. It is damaging RW article content. There is no reason to remove any of that content, only because a-b-d blogged about it. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 18:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
D/EK are both the same person (very friendly with a-b-d who told him to come here to remove content from Kierkegaard’s article) and according to various sources online EK is trying to be a transsexual in real life. D/EK is obviously very confused about his own sexuality, he pretends to be female on here and has been dressing up as a female in real life, even though he is male. He shouldn’t be discussing sexual subjects because he doesn’t know what the majority think about these topics or what is socially acceptable. He’s got odd-ball views. Legalizing incest is not acceptable, Kirkegaard is wrong and irrational. We don’t need EK to pretend otherwise. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
They’re not the same person. — Oxyaena Harass 21:09, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
[ping]@Oxyaena Why is EK making up outright lies? They just claimed virtually every poster on this wiki has “threatened them with murder and rape them” – an obvious falsehood with of course no evidence. I certainly haven’t. Some mentally unstable people like EK have a huge victim-playing complex. Additionally, they lied and said I created transphobic articles/Reddit threads about D. No idea what they’re talking about. EK is a disturbing case of a pathological liar, they seem incapable of ever telling the truth.Legend (talk) 21:20, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Oxyaena – D/EK are both the same person. On Reddit D after being questioned he has admitted in his own words EK is him. He is an individual who likes to pretend to be a female online. He was globally banned on Wikipedia, using both D and EK usernames both traced exactly to the same ip. There are no public records or birth records for EK, but you can find them for D. They are both the same person. This said person has now sided with a-b-d. Sometimes online D/EK he identifies as pansexual or transsexual. It is one person. You will never see them online at the same time talking. Ask to have a phone call with both this people or a skype, there will never be two people, impossible. It is the same guy. 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:44, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
There is a similarity here between this interchange and the recent Reddit trollsocking. Oliver did appear there claiming to be Oliver, and many throwaway accounts showed up, hiding identity and being highly disruptive, with Darryl Smith agenda, apparently. Here, though, Mikemikev impersonation could be suspected, though it would be a lot of trouble for little or no gain. Oliver is banned, and it was originally because of his attacks on EK and Dysklyver. While he claims not to be the IP, he does not actually distance himself from the IP claims.
EK ascribes behavior to Oliver that might not have been him, but it is not clear. One thing that is clearly going on is that the Rats have lost all patience with Oliver.
Long-term, and commonly when the Smiths are involved in some way, massive impersonation and trollsocking appears. Oliver has always denied that this is him. He implied at one point that it might be his brother. Oliver has never supported the development of clarity; if, say, Emil Kirkegaard was impersonated, he could have known but never confronted it. Further, he also just referenced why Emil Kirkegaard was blocked: for outing. What outing? Well, Kirkegaard had no idea of the history, and discovered the socking, and mentioned it. He was, after all, being attacked by Oliver (and Oliver later acknowledged creation of the Kirkegaard article). He did not know that there was a Rule Zero on RatWiki: thall shalt not mention Smith. Not even indirectly. It was heavily and intensely enforced, for years.
As for blocks, I’ve only ever supported blocking if someone did harassment such as doxing or serious threats; this explains for example Emil Kirkegaard‘s ban.
This set off the klaxon. This is actually beautifully clear, and shows the relationship of Oliver and his brother. Did Oliver know what his brother did? I have seen again and again that Oliver appears to believe what is convenient for his world-view, and his view is that Kirkegaard is insane and thus could do almost anything, including, say, impersonating himself, and lying about it. Oliver actually claimed that he did not know his brother’s accounts, but he also complained about the doxxing of his “family” on this blog, and the only other member of his family relevant would be his brother. Truth will out, and he lied about there being no brother, though sometimes he modified that to claim that his brother doesn’t know what is going on, while, at the same time claiming that the goal here is to harass by Google. I.e., supposedly, this is all designed to defame Darryl L. Smith, who is completely innocent and doesn’t even know about it.
It takes a certain kind of mind to invent these possibilities, and to apparently believe them. Or he is simply lying, and we already know that he lies — or so so delusional that he doesn’t remember what he wrote and claims that reports of it are “lies.”
What happened with Kirkegaard? He described what he saw on his RatWiki user page. It was not doxxing, it was listing accounts that were clearly acting in a consistent way. This began at 01:09, 19 October 2017. Kirkegaard listed Skeptical among the accounts. He was wrong, but it was an error that many made. Skeptical was not the one who created his article. He had edited it, though.
And then, see the deletion log.
- 01:15, 19 October 2017 Skeptical deleted a revision. But what revision? Normally, in my experience, the current revision cannot be deleted, one would revert or edit the page to remove offensive material, then hide what is now not the current revision. At this point, there were only two revisions; the first one created by Kirkegaard by IP, then the second. So there is a mystery here. The deletion summary is “edit summary hidden and username hidden” but the hidden edit summary was the 1:16 edit below.
- 01:16, 19 October 2017, Emil edited the page to add an off-wiki account clearly impersonating him. The edit summary was (Impersonators and harassment), hidden by Skeptical. (I have previously seen 1-minute glitches in edit timing, this looks like one.)
- 01:16, 19 October 2017, Skeptical unhid the user name. He’s going to complain, so he wanted it easily visible, my interpretation. The edit summary: (doxxing, posting false allegations about Rationalwiki editors)
- 01:17, 19 October 2017, Skeptical blocked EmilOWK. (more doxxing from Emil, including links to real peoples names and IP addresses.)
- 01:20, 19 October 2017 Skeptical reverted and hid the user’s revision. (doxxing, links to real names and IP addresses)
- 01:21, 19 October 2017 Skeptical hid again, unclear what, but the summary was (doxing of real life names)
- 01:23, 19 October 2017, Skeptical hid Kirkegaard’s listing of the Wikipedia impersonation account, covered in an SPI case. This could have been Mikemikev, except that Mikemikev would impersonate Kirkegaard is unlikely. This is what Darryl Smith impersonation socking on Wikipedia looks like. A trolling edit, clearly intended to foster attention and probably a block. Mikemikev normally shows a little more caution.
- 02:25, 19 October 2017 Bongolian blocked Kirkegaard indef. (Doxing: more doxxing from Emil, including links to real peoples names and IP addresses.)
The only editing of EmilOWK after this was on his talk page, this discussion. In it, Skeptical substantiates the “real name” claim with “Ben.” That refers to the creator of the RW article on Kirkegaard. Kirkegaard correctly points out that the RatWiki account was an impersonation. Skeptical makes it clear that anyone who is harassed on RatWiki — as Kirkegaard clearly was, as well as elsewhere in ways that could be linked, they are to be blocked or banned. Yet he and other Rats routinely doxx their targets, claim that such and such an account is a sock of another, and often give real names, having created articles on the person. Skeptical mentions me as a current example — at that time –, and Skeptical was highly involved in that “drama.”
Skeptical was Darryl L. Smith, brother of Oliver D. Smith, and it is Oliver who created the RatWiki article on Kirkegaard, and these users warp and twist evidence and interpretation, which is effectively trolling the targets, using RatWiki.
Skeptical was recently desysopped, though he had not edited since a few days after the events above (he disappeared when accused of being Oliver), for “suspected ban evasion.” He was never banned, it is Oliver who was banned. However, he was intimately involved in long-term disruption, including that begun by Oliver. Impersonation and trollsocking was Darryl’s trademark long-term MO, not Oliver’s.
This was discussed at User_talk:David_Gerard/Archive2#Doxing
The “real name” charge was repeated there. In fact, what had been quoted was only the fake name, the impersonation that Oliver later claimed was not an impersonation, because he spelled the name differently. There was also a link to another impersonation of the same user, this time spelling it correctly, but none of this was doxxing the real person, rather, that he would be impersonated, as Kirkegaard was. And, in fact, as that real person was also impersonated on Wikipedia by . . .
Darryl L. Smith. I.e., Skeptical
Which is where I came in, having discovered, shortly before this, that impersonation and then, as I investigated it, I was attacked by an army of trollsocks, in what became a familiar pattern, still happening on Reddit. Those pages did not mention Oliver and Darryl Smith. Later, on the blog, when evidence as to their identity became overwhelming, and they were clearly a public nuisance, I did start to name names. By that time, every detail of my life that they could find that might be presented to look bad or weird was documented in detail on RatWiki and that continued elsewhere as well.
Emil OWK claimed that he had not heard of me, when Skeptical accused him of taking the information from me. Most of that information did not come from me, but I had, by this time, listed connected RatWiki accounts, as suspected socks.
In fact, anyone who looked at the RatWiki accounts for signs of repeat editing by different accounts, could see it. This was all obvious, so why did the Rats react so strongly? Well, Oliver Smith has claimed to be the major contributor of RatWiki articles. Darryl Smith has also been prolific. So they accept this because it’s convenient and useful for their purposes. Smith socking on Wikipedia, particularly by Darryl, has been defacto accepted because it is convenient for that faction to have an attack dog, to do the dirty work, and they can then be blocked when they go too far, tut tut, showing that they are fair. But they don’t undo the damage. And most Wikipedians do not take the time to investigate. Actual evidence is boring. And, besides, someone who compiles it (it’s work!) must be a fanatic, is disruptive, and should be blocked. So if there is evidence, it is probably cherry-picked and misleadin, right?
When the author of an article, that the reader likes, cherry-picks, tut tut, so what? The subject is a crazy loon and reading more, to see if the report is balanced, is too much work. And nobody is responsible.
It’s just the way it is.
Another note on this: the Reddit account that Kirkegaard pointed to was definitely an impersonation, and it spelled the name correctly, but the message was exactly the same as Oliver’s in his writing on RatWiki, in the article. That included posting on the RatWiki subreddit. That person does not want his name mentioned, he was roundly doxxed and defamed over his history, which he left behind as the product of his own mental disorders, and I’ve talked with him extensively, and, yes, definitely some syndrome, including delusional interpretation (sometimes called “hallucinations”) but also a lot of recovery since then. Part of recovery is authenticity, as distinct from denial. People who go through that can end up wiser than normal.