Update: Skeptical added this comment to the Article on me created by an Anglo Pyramidologist sock.

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]

He lies, on multiple verifiable points. Skeptical is an Anglo Pyramidologist sock. From a review of what these socks do (from an extensive history) and a review of Skeptical’s activity, it’s obvious. I found this independently. (And I was blocked by Skeptical for gathering pure evidence without accusations. Suspicion of sock puppetry, naming accounts — not personal information — isn’t “doxxing,” as claimed. It is not even disruptive, it’s totally allowed on WMF wikis. Ordinarily.

(At the time that I wrote this, I was not claiming “Smith brothers.” I have subsequently seen conclusive evidence that there are two brothers, Oliver and Darryl Smith, and that they, on occasion have edited from the family home. (And that was directly admitted on Wikipedia in 2011, just not the names.) Not that this is a “group of editors living in the same house.” That’s standard AP straw man argument. I do not know that both brothers edited the article on me, except that the original interest probably came from Darryl, and Skeptical could be Oliver. This, by the way, complicates sock puppetry studies — and so on Wikipedia, they will often refuse to distinguish between people who live together or who are closely associated in real life. If you let your brother edit disruptively, and if you happen to edit from the same location (even just once!), you could get blocked.)

Note 36 is a reference to my RW block log. It shows:

  • 15:06, 26 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) changed block settings for Abd (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled, cannot edit own talk page) (repeated doxxing as well as harassment, now attacking rationalwiki users on his personal blog)

Skeptical knows that nobody is banned from RW “permanently” simply on the action of a single wet-behind-the-ears sysop. There is the Coop for that, and the last thing these trolls want to do is call attention to this on the Coop. I’ve been thinking of doing it, but … not yet. But AP socks care nothing at all about truth, nor about rationality, they care about revenge and attack.

Note 37 is a link to the overall RationalWiki page here. They have an article on me, I return the favor. Pages are not actually blog “sections”, butare places for developed content. That content might be moved about. Of course, with a known incoming link, I’ll keep it where it is or create a redirect.

What I did on meta was begin to document the Wikipedia, Wikiversity, and meta sock downpour, and I was massively attacked there for it. Then the RationalWiki article was written, fulfilling a threat to retaliate. This is no “conspiracy theory,” it’s an actual confirmed sock family, with clearly visible behaviors.

No, I did not claim that a “group of RationalWiki editors live in the same house.” What the record shows is that there are apparently two brothers who at some points have edited wikis from the same IP address, and there is information that, at one point, they were living with their parents — or one of them was at college and was visiting home. I am not certain that any information I have on these brothers is reliable, but they are considered as if a single user on Wikipedia, and so too were all the attack socks on Wikiversity and Meta. I do not know if there is only one person, or two; but early in the history one brother (the one who had the account Anglo Pyramidologist) claimed that the massive numbers of socks were being created by the other brother, and actually asked that the IP be blocked to prevent it. In a later SPI report on Wikipedia, this brother asked that his brother be checkusered, to discover how many socks he had.

There is also a possible sister who was caught by checkuser on Wikipedia. (One of the socks mentioned the sister. The writing style of the sister is different, as far as I’ve seen. This is  HealthyGirl, who was blocked purely on checkuser evidence, which easily could occur if accessing the internet from the same house (using the same service provider), or even more if using the same computer. This supports the “same family” interpretation. This “sister,” however, shared a similar interest, but did not, as far as I’ve seen, edit disruptively (which is why there was no complaint). See the SPI case.

The case for HealthyGirl (and a pile of other socks of GoblinFace, later merged with the AP sock archive), was filed by Opabinia Regalis, who gained checkuser rights in 2015 when elected to the Arbitration Committee. No evidence was shown, but it is a practical certainty that this checkuser already knew and was filing the case as a formality.

Krelnik defended HealthyGirl . Krelnik is Timothy Farley, a well-known skeptic. I am not investigating Krelnik here, but there are possible connections to the Smith brothers (who claimed approval and association with a well-known skeptical organization, which could match Farley).  (I have as yet seen no disruptive editing from Krelnik, and even the opposite. From one of his own blogs, he is a pseudoskeptic, but that is fairly common and no offense.)

Also defending HealthyGirl was another user who left a comment without signing it:

Healthygirl is not anglopyramidologist, you can clearly see that two or more users have used the same or similar IP addresses. I know for a fact they are not the same person because I know who healthygirl is. Not that it matters because they were abused with offsite harressment and they retired, but admins have done a lousy job of banning her. It is not the same person.

He’s right. He knows HealthyGirl because this is probably his brother or sister. The story of common IP is all through the AP sock investigations and it is more or less equivalent to “living in the same house,” at least occasionally, which is ridiculed on RationalWiki, by the same family of socks, particularly including Skeptical.

(I have seen no evidence for a sister in the family. But she might not have been living at home when the data I have seen was compiled.)

The brothers allegedly have different interests, but what I’ve found in my study is a lot of crossover. The same old interests are present, but both sets of interests (the two possible brothers) show high disruption. What is actually happening I don’t know. There are others who have been real-world harassed by one or more of the brothers, who have their real names and other information. I have verified none of that, but these are the “Smith brothers,” Oliver and Daryl. They are well-known. Here is a page on them, by Rome Viharo, who has also been extensively harassed by them.

There was an article created by an AP sock, on RW, RationalWiki Smith brothers conspiracy theory, promptly nominated for deletion by another AP sock. It was blamed on Rome Viharo, but the page actually ridiculed the idea of there being any such “conspiracy.” No, the page was created by an AP sock, from many evidences.

Claiming that a family of socks is active, known to be socks in a place where there is checkuser identification (WMF wikis, and there has also been identification on blogs, I think, where blog admin can see the same information as a checkuser), is not a “conspiracy theory” by any stretch of the imagination. But, again, Smith socks routinely lie and impersonate and deceive (and if one of them — i.e, a different user “incorrectly” identified as a sock — doesn’t, he may still be considered responsible unless he truly blows the whistle.)

The subpage here that studies RW AP socks is RationalWiki/Anglo Pyramidologist.  That is just the most recent findings, from a relatively quick study. One of these socks claimed to be “running RW” with having created a huge number of socks, and how happy he was that RW doesn’t have checkuser. In fact, David Gerard is a tech and would have access to server logs, the checkuser extension merely makes it easier. But Gerard likes these socks doing what they do, that’s my conclusion, and he and his friends liked what they were doing on Wikipedia. Attack dogs, that rile up their enemies and then they can be picked off.

The first attempt on the RW Anglo Pyramidologist study was deleted as “doxxing,” but it did not doxx, it did not reveal the real-life identify of the Smith Brothers. I am now mentioning the name, there is no  longer any reason not to. There are people looking at legal action. At this point, I have not suffered sufficient harm to consider that myself, but there are people who have been harmed, and I fully support prosecution of those who impersonate and lie and harm or attempt harm.

Skeptical, recently given sysop tools on RationalWiki, is one of over 200 identified “Anglo Pyramodol0gist” socks,. This is a history of that account, showing why I consider Skeptical likely to be an AP sock.

AP socks not uncommonly attack each other, it is part of the disruption and deception, a smokescreen. Collectively, they doxx and attack, but then can individually distance themselves from it. Of more interest to me is the few connected long-term users, including some users with high privilege levels, who use these disposable attack socks for their own purposes. We will see that in this study.

On RationalWiki, this is routine, but my sense is growing that this explains a great deal of what has happened on Wikipedia. Hence, while RationalWiki is small and largely inconsequential, some users from Wikipedia go there and show how they behave when the gloves are off. What may appear as simple POV-pushing on Wikipedia becomes outright viciousness.

Contributions  Block Log (blockee)  Block log (blocker)  Deletion log  User rights (target)

01:09, 23 September 2017 User account Skeptical (talk | contribs) was created

02:16, 23 September 2017 Skeptical created, as his first edit, the RW article on Laird Shaw. He was immediately joined by MrOrganic, also a likely AP sock. MrOrganic was more blatant with outing; for example, this sequence doxxes Heyguy as a “Rome Viharo sock,” and has previously accused Laird Shaw of impersonating RW users on his own forum, the very behavior that AP socks are known for.

Rome Viharo and Emil Kirkegaard are favorite targets of AP socks, along with mikemikev and Ben Steigmann. The account EmilOWK is Kirkegaard, who posted this on Talk:Laird Shaw:

Note that this page was likely created by under two sock-puppets (he has numerous profiles on this website). Both profiles used for this article have no other contributions. . RationalWiki admins should be aware that Oliver S. is using the site to essentially seek out random people who he thinks (rightly or wrongly) to like something RW labels pseudoscience (or fringe etc.), and then put their name on this website.

So Kirkegaard thinks that Skeptical and MrOrganic are Oliver S. socks, and this was posted the day that the Laird Shaw article was created. Skeptical and MrOrganic continued to work on the Shaw article and to “argue” on the Talk page. The brothers? Maybe. There are signs of disagreements, and Skeptical later blocked a series of AP socks and deleted their pages. But AP would be fully capabable of doing that with his own creations, ones that were only created to harass, knowing that someone else would do it if he didn’t.

On 5 October 2017, Marky, as his first edit, created the RW article on me, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax. He had obviously spent many days researching this. Why the sudden interest in me? I had been almost entirely inactive on RationalWiki for years. The reason is obvious. It was attempted revenge for my activity exposing his impersonation socks on Wikipedia, Wikiversity, and the WMF meta wiki.

Then an article was created (October 8, I think) on the “RationalWiki Smith brothers conspiracy theory,” by MrOrganic, which Marky nominated for deletion as “A load of bullshit from Rome Viharo.” MrOrganic is certainly not Rome Viharo! There is some possibility that there are two active brothers; but MrOrganic created the Conspiracy article with the official line: the whole idea of a conspiracy is preposterous.

— But the concept of the Smith Brothers is not a conspiracy theory: there is a family of sock puppets, with an early account being, on Wikipedia, Anglo Pyramidologist, and sometimes one of the identified socks claims “my brother is the disruptive one, creating many sock puppets….” but both, if there are two, sock extensively. [I recently received email from Oliver D. Smith, using a known public account, and he claimed that “99.9% of the accounts were his brother.” I don’t trust him at all, because he lied on many points where I could confirm the facts. Then “David Smith” appeared, claiming to represent the family. Then a supposed lawyer appeared, demanding I take pages down, and then he turned around and offered to assassinate Smith. What Oliver Smith does is beyond ridiculous, and I suspect that part of his “success” is due to people being unable to believe that he could do so much.

(If there are two brothers, that could explain the level of activity, better, but … I have not actually seen signs so far of simultaneous activity. Rather, on this page, one day’s editing will be seen. It looks like one person creating all of it. The accounts are not interleaved. I will eventually do a full study of all AP socks, if I have time. It is possible to spoof edit overlap, to a degree, but it is very difficult to imitate true independent users and keep it all straight. Sock puppets are successful because administrators don’t care or don’t have the time or the tools to investigate.)

The deletion nomination.  (Archive copy). Without waiting for a deletion discussion conclusion, the Smith Brothers article was deleted by David Gerard, October 8. In the discussion, DG wrote: “Nuked as a really obvious attempt at harassment. Sysops can extract anything useful if there is anything useful.”

I commented on the attached talk page. This was quick-archived, then the archive was deleted, by David Gerard, October 9, (Harassment: attempted doxing … if mods particularly disagree they can put it back, but …)” Doxxing has a definition on RW, and there was no doxxing on that talk page. 

That same day, Gerard desysopped me, with “(attempted harassment, ban may follow)”. Who  was being harassed? Later, I came to see this as part of a long-term pattern of protecting Oliver Smith.

(No RW article on Oliver D. Smith has ever been created, but it was salted against creation. Why?)

Gerard’s actions were solicited on User talk:David Gerard by Marky, and Skeptical gets quite involved.

Eventually Skeptical deleted the Smith brothers Talk page itself.

His summary: (Doxing: doxing (article is already deleted for the same)). He’s lying, there was no doxxing on that page, and doxxing would normally be handled by revision deletion, not the entire page. The only “dox” was the name “Smith,” which had been put up by, it’s obvious, a Smith brother. (The article uses some of the identical language used by an Anglo Pyramidologist sock about “zero technical evidence.” Which simply is not true, but … I had not provided the technical evidence on RationalWiki because it was unnecessary there, and also implicated a more established Anglo Pyramidologist editor (or so it seemed at the time. As with many AP socks, he vanished.) However, any RationalWiki sysop can see the evidence, and some of it is still public. (I have found that one crucial edit was later hidden, with no trace in logs. That would take high privilege.)

What is a certainty at this point is that Skeptical/Marky and many others are socks of the troll identified on Wikipedia and Wikiversity and meta as Anglo Pyramidologist, so Gerard is doing their bidding. The section on User talk:Gerard titled “Doxing” is hilarious.  This is what Skeptical deleted.

The only real names there are impersonation targets (such as Rome Viharo, or Ben Steigmann). I doubt  that EmilOWK got this information from me. He compiled it himself, it’s obvious.

All of Skeptical’s actions since he created the account have been following the Smith agenda and pursuing his special interests, generally revenge. It’s easier to just say “Smith” rather than “Anglo Pyramidologist,” and while that is alleged to be a real name, it is so common that it does not actually accuse anyone specific. In fact, however, I did not introduce “Smith” on RW, as I recall. Anglo Pyramidologist did that himself.


David Gerard is responsible for how he has allowed himself to be used. There are larger connections and issues, there are connections with the general skeptical community. Others, not Smith and who would presumably not approve of what Smith does, have approved the activities of these socks in attacking those with differing points of view. There is a coordinated faction active on Wikipedia, it’s obvious and quite public, and this has never been fully confronted there, that faction has been protected, probably because it serves the larger “anti-fringe, anti-pseudoscience” faction by attacking “enemies.” (Arbcomm has addressed this on occasion with half-measures, useless, and not followed up.)

Bigs gave sysop rights to Skeptical, quite rapidly, 9 October, 2017. Bigs has not been so obviously promoting the Smith agenda, and appears to be a general purpose RW user. See Skeptical User rights log.

Christopher, as seen in that log, gave Skeptical  autopatrolled rights (which allows bypass of Captcha), 24 September, 2017. I have come across Christopher in other AP-related actions, so this bears further examination. AP is using RationalWiki purposes, and community habits, for his own purposes, which are far from rational and the promotion of critical thinking, but sanity has always been elusive on RationalWiki. The site in the past was blatant trolling and lulz, it was encouraged.

Evidence that Skeptical is an Anglo Pyramidologist sock

Skeptical is an SPA entirely devoted to special and easily-identifiable AP interests, and has made practically no effort to conceal this. This has been standard for most AP socks that have been identified in the past through checkuser. Even though Skeptical has sysop privileges on RW, and one might think that AP would then consider the account valuable, it is obvious that it has not been considered worth the effort. AP may have other socks which have been more heavily protected from identification.

Registration: 01:09, 23 September 2017

First edit was the creation of an article on Laird Shaw, an AP target.  02:16, 23 September 2017

Skeptical’s contributions at that point., a total of 11, for two days. Who “forgot to do this”? All those contributions but two were to the article he created or the Talk page.  Those other two edits were to add  Category:People with schizophrenia having added it to Harun Yahya

(The source on Harun Yahya’s alleged schizophrenia actually casts doubt on the diagnosis, on the opinion of Edip Yuksel, whom I know personally and who is reasonably likely to be correct. Cherry-picking from sources is too common with RW attack articles.)

Skeptical then added the category to Laird Shaw, which would have been his purpose. The coverage in the Laird Shaw article shows that Shaw was at one point diagnosed, but being diagnosed with schizophrenia can be iffy — and transient. A diagnosis, per se, does not establish the fact of being a person “with schizophrenia,” especially not as an ongoing condition. Various conditions can imitate schizophrenia, and real schizophrenia also sometimes resolves.

Skeptical continued to edit only with regard to AP interests, with very few exceptions. (“AP interests” have been determined through long-term observation of topics that identified AP socks have edited, and through the very common involvement of additional AP socks in articles being edited. Obviously, simply editing one of these articles is not much evidence, but when nearly all edits are so visible, the evidence becomes strong. This is the Wikipedia “duck test,” and it is how most socks are identified there, with what AP refers to as technical evidence (as in “you have no technical evidence” — which was not true), being only a confirmation (and being used to identify sleepers who have avoided the Favorite Topics, or who have not edited disruptively within them).

  • 00:49, 9 October 2017 Bigs (talk | contribs) changed group membership for Skeptical from Autopatrolled to Sysop (Seems sane.)

Skeptical had 60 contributions at this point.

None of these contributions were outside of AP’s well-established interests. The last edit shown,  00:35, 9 October 2017, a few minutes before being opped, was an attack on me, and showed involvement in drama. But he had apparently moved a discussion. How was he even aware of that discussion? (He had edited it, those edits and the move do not show up in his contributions because he deleted the pages).

After that, Skeptical shows no actions or contributions until October 18, when he begins blocking blatant AP socks and deleting pages they created. A series of accounts were created: for example:

And then Skeptical, who had not edited, nor, apparently, even looked at RW, since October 9, jumps in and starts deleting and blocking:

(This is covered below with detail of the edit timings, which are diagnostic.)

One other RW sysop had apparently seen some of the disruption:

And once he had deleted those pages and blocked the blatant attack accounts, then:

That, of course, was the goal and purpose of the entire sequence. (There was no doxing on that page, to my knowledge. Listing socks is not doxxing.) (copy of User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist as deleted) (copy of AfD as deleted)

Skeptical also blocked EmilOWK, the real account for another AP target, see RationalWiki/AngloPyramidologist#Emil.

Looking at Skeptical’s full contributions and logs, his interests are entirely aligned with the AP sock family. He has edited practically nothing outside that, and he has not edited since November 7. His later actions deal with topics that are also familiar from researching AP. Kiwi Farms, Lolcow. Given other actions of his, I’m surprised this is still visible. On his User talk page.

Hi Oliver!
How’s it been holding up big guy? Parkordude91

Abd Lomax‘s conspiracy theory about my identity is getting old… I’m not that person. Also if you look on the Kiwi Farms article, what I actually did was delete the entire Joshua Conner Moon page (see what it formerly looked like on I also deleted the Joshua Conner Moon talk, but I was reverted. The new article on Kiwi Farms looks pretty neutral if you ask me, i.e. it only says “critics point out” as if others disagree, furthermore it notes Moon’s comments about killing Muslims are possibly not serious, although that’s disputable (only he knows). The section on Joshua is now a mere 3 lines. Skeptical (talk) 03:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

So how does Skeptical get from “Oliver” to “Abd Lomax’s conspiracy theory”?

If there is a conspiracy, I have not documented it, sock puppetry not being a conspiracy, and I did not originate the idea of Skeptical being “Oliver,” nor did I promote that on RationalWiki, or anywhere. I have on this page mentioned the claim that there are two brothers, Oliver and Darryl, the former being the original AngloPyramidologist user on Wikipedia, but this was already widespread rumor. I still consider it rumor. [I later saw confirmation, I now consider this fact.] Then how does he get to “Kiwi Farms?” The link to “Parkordude91” was broken (that user must have mangled his signature in his preferences), the actual user is this. Parkordude91’s only other edit was to Lolcow and doesn’t mention Moon or Kiwi Farms, for that matter.

So how would Skeptical get from “Oliver,” as well, to Kiwi Farms and Joshua Conner Moon. My suspicion is he knows that these are hot “Smith brothers” topics, because he is a Smith brother. If that is the real name; as I have said before, I do not have personal knowledge on that. And with those edits he protected his User talk page (which probably will not fly long-term) and stopped editing. In over two weeks he has not apparently looked at RationalWiki. With that account, that is.

Among Skeptical’s last actions before he disappeared, he full-protected his user page and user talk page (very unusual unless there had been extensive vandalism, which there had not been). But … there was outing, and he did, in fact, revision-delete some of it:

Lol you locked your talk page Oliver. HAHAHAHAHAHA

Is it nice in [redacted, known address for Oliver Smith’s family]  in your moms house today?

The deletion log says: “(Potentially libelous information).” That was not “potentially libelous information,” so, again, he lied. was the IP adding that. Geolocation matches AP, perhaps. Skeptical blocked the IP.

Before that, he had also rev-del’d his Talk page, hiding the comment made by an IP:

The term pedophilia is commonly used in a legal context to an adult who has sexual intercourse with someone under the legal age of consent; that’s always been my understanding of the word. If you look up an age of consent map by country, virtually everywhere is between 16 and 18. Those figures are not arbitrary since they match legal adulthood, which is also between 16 and 18 (nearly everywhere). So this is why under 16-18 is legally a “minor”. The only people who try to re-define pedophilia outside of law are pedophiles/pedophile apologists.Skeptical (talk) 15:33, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

The word is never used in a legal context and is totally undefined by law, Oliver. You’re just a sadistic lying mentally-ill slanderer, perfect for you this Communist website. You’ll get what’s coming to you believe me. (talk) 10:11, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

While the IP is reactive and unsophisticated in the political analysis, he (unlikely she, eh?) was correct about the word not being used in a legal context. Pedophilia has nothing to do with consent, medically it is about a sexual preference for prepubescent children. It just happens to be that such children, legally, cannot give consent. Sex under the legal age of consent is punishable by law regardless of whether the person is a “pedophile” or not, and “being a pedophile” is not illegal, at least not in the U.S. and the U.K. However, a claim that someone is a pedophile based on thin evidence (such as a differing opinion about the legal issue) is common for AP socks. “Pedophile” is a splendid insult to toss. Gets people riled up.

Skeptical, of course, blocked the IP. I have linked to geolocation. This is a bit further west than I have seen any AP socks. Good chance this is, however, the same person as the other IP.

No wonder he disappeared. It had gotten too hot. What’s he gonna do? Range block millions of IP addresses? Is he “Oliver” and is his mom’s address on [redacted, it was indeed his family address]? At this point, I don’t know; his reaction to the information, however, makes it seem plausible. The claim matches known AP home IP.

So this led me to, archived from Lolcow wiki, an article on Oliver D. Smith. That wiki is far from a reliable source. The more fuss AP makes, the more is discovered and published. He has been relentless in harassing others and sooner or later there is blowback. Documenting what he has done is not harassment, certainly not legally. Calling him up might be. Or not. Depends.

However, when I read that Lolcow Wiki article, I recognize, now, much of it as factual. It is far more factual than what I see from AP, as to what I know myself. But I have not verified a great deal that is there. It claims more than 100 socks on Lolcow Wiki alone. That article, though, is extensively and carefully sourced.

As to distinguishing between Oliver and Darryl Smith, Skeptical would likely be Oliver, i.e., the original Anglo Pyramidologist. Not that it really matters, the brothers, if there are brothers, support each other and cover up for each other.

Another page documenting the history of Oliver Smith is very thorough: from Encyclopedia Dramatica. I don’t particularly trust any of this without verifying it, but it’s thoroughly sourced.

I find very little on Darryl Smith by comparison. It is possible that the two have been confused in some cases. They more or less invite that.

AP suspected sock activity, October 18, 2017

I just reviewed this sequence. At the time, I was suspicious that Skeptical had inside knowledge of the trolling, his response came very rapidly. Reviewing this now (February, 2018), this is completely clear as a standard AP operation.

On Wikiversity, when I began to document the SPA activity (AP socks typically appear as Single Purpose Accounts, not new users, with strong agenda), the sock master went ballistic and created a flurry of accounts with attack names very similar to those created in this sequence on RationalWiki. This was repeated on the meta wiki.

In addition to the trolling socks (listed as accounts 1-, there were three AP suspected socks active on October 18: Marky, who had created the RW article on me in retaliation for my exposure of his WMF socking, Asgardian, and Skeptical. Skeptical had been inactive for 9 days. What can be seen in the edit record, reproduced below from mixed logs (and some of the contributions were later deleted), is this:

(Many edits have been deleted, largely by Skeptical.)

There was some discussion with Marky and Asgardian on my User talk page, and on Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax. At 14:54, I started the AP RationalWiki sock study. (It was barely begun, see archive copy. This was merely an intention to study.)

At 15:28, Marky tagged the study for deletion. At this point, it contained no RW account names except my own. But AP would know what I was intending to do.

At 15:46, Marky complained on User talk:David Gerard about the study. That was his last edit, he vanished.

At 15:55, 9 minutes later, the avalanche of disruptive socks (DS) began. To a not-too-careful observer, this could look like me harassing many users, with highly disruptive page creations and provocative user names, though the reality was that this was harassment aimed at me and clearly attempting to draw hostile attention to the sock study, which is exactly what AP had done on Wikiversity and meta.

At 16:21, the last DS edit was made.

At 16:34 , 13 minutes later — remember, Skeptical had been inactive — Skeptical began deleting contributions and blocking the DS accounts.

At 16:42, Skeptical posts to the Saloon Bar with “Abd drama,” blaming me for the DS editing.

I was just pointing out the obvious (for anyone who does more than glance at the situation). It was in user space, not the Coop or Saloon Bar. However, if AP was stalking me — and he has been for many months — he might feel … what? Upset? The appearance of such studies has always driven him momentarily insane. Hence the pile of DSs.

It was not until later, at 18:04, that I added the account names to the form I had created. You can see that my research had just begun. I included names later ruled out on review, and was cautious about some names where I later became certain.

At 18:28, 18 October 2017 blocked me for three months for “(repeated doxxing as well as harassment)”.

At  18:36 Skeptical makes an AP-agenda edit to The Saloon Bar. The discussion defines doxxing, and there had been no doxxing by that definition, nor has any neutral RW editor confirmed doxxing over this. There is abstract discussion and blame of others, not realizing that the master doxxer, creating harassing article after article, is likely two or three of the accounts commenting. (In one comment later, here, a “family member” wrote that impersonating Ben Steigmann was not impersonation, since — allegedly — that was not his real name. It apparently is. AP routinely creates impersonation accounts, and this sequence shows how even the most outrageous creations can have the desired effect.

(The account BenSteigmans had created the article on Emil O. W. Kirkegaard, and the Saloon Bar discussion was about EmilOWK, which was the real Kirkegaard account, though the discussion was started by an impersonator asking for unblock. Then EmilOWK was blocked for “doxxing” based on the mention of “Ben.” I.e., the impersonator.

At 18:43, Skeptical posted to User talk:David Gerard that he had blocked me for doxxing and harassment.

Classic AP: harass a user, create massive drama, then arrange a block for harassment and creating drama.

The next day, Skeptical lied to EmilOWK about what had happened, and ended up also blocking Emil (that’s a real name account for Emil O. W. Kirkegaard, massively harassed on RW and in real life by Oliver Smith.) Emil has been a major target for AP. Oliver D. Smith created a blog solely to attack him, and when he wrote me — from a confirmed address, he devoted much effort to calling Kirkegaard a “neo-Nazi pedophile.” What a concidence that such reprehensible traits are concentrated in one person, it saves a lot of effort! (There is no evidence that Kirkegaard is a pedophile, and only a ragged feather of evidence, contradicted by the remainder of the source, that he was a “pedophile apologist.” He is a racialist (“race realist it’s now called sometimes) and hereditarian on intelligence. Those ideas are used by racists, but not racist in themselves, and certainly not “neo-Nazi,” especially used in the present tense.. This is where AP fit perfectly into RationalWiki, which loves to attack “pseudoscience” and “irrationality,” but which is not in the least careful, and loves snark and innuendo, no matter how misleading.

Here is the material deleted from Emil’s Talk page by Skeptical, and for which he was “banned.” Shame on you, RationalWiki, for tolerating this.

The edit record:

  • 00:35, 9 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+468)‎ . . RationalWiki:Saloon bar ‎ (National ID) last Skeptical edit before the activity below.
  • 00:11, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (-4)‎ . . m Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ [Asgardian]
  • 00:41, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+10,842)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎700 socks and counting, WTF?: new section) [Abd]
  • 04:02, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+913)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (700 socks and counting, [Marky]
  • 04:05, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+205)‎ . . User talk:Asgardian ‎  [Marky]
  •  WTF? [Marky]
  • 06:52, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+2,292)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎‎ [Asgardian]
  • 12:22, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+2,373)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎700 socks and counting, WTF?: as we age….) [Abd]
  • 12:28, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+680)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎Spiritualism) [Abd]
  • 12:29, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+1)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎Spiritualism: fmt) [Abd]
  • 12:30, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+1)‎ . . m Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎Spiritualism: sp) [Abd]
  • 13:04, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+2,069)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎Spiritualism: spiritualism defined and distinguished from spiritual) [Abd]
  • 13:10, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+210)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (→‎Spiritualism: yes, isn’t that obvious?) [Abd]
  • 13:53, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+557)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎‎ [Asgardian]
  • 14:47, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+272)‎ . . Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax ‎ (Spiritualism [Marky]
  • 14:54, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist (start page) [Abd]
  • 15:28, 18 October 2017 (diff | deletion log | view) . . User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist [Marky] added AfD tag: {{Article for deletion|[[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]]’s personal vendetta against a Wikipedia user. Not relevant to Rationalwiki. Off-mission.}}
  • 15:31, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+104)‎ . . RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Log ‎ [Marky]
  • 15:32, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (-35)‎ . . RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Log ‎ [Marky]
  • 15:46, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+331)‎ . . User talk:David Gerard ‎ (Drama: Recent events.) [last contribution!) [Marky]
  • 15:55, 18 October 2017 User account Waller Joel MU ANGLO PYRAMIDOLOGIST ROME VIHARO big poo in tiolet stinker dinker (talk | contribs) was created  (account 1)
  • 15:58, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist  (account 1)
  • 15:56, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist  (account 1)
  • 15:56, 18 October 2017 User account ABD ANGLO PYRAMIDOLOGIST BOTH GAY MEN WITH BIG DICKS (talk | contribs | block) was created  (account 2)
  • 16:00, 18 October 2017 User account Waller MU Joel Abd (talk | contribs) was created (account 3)
  • 16:03, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+813)‎ . . User:Abd  (account 3)
  • 16:08, 18 October 2017 User account Andrew B. Chung dirty old bloke from china (talk | contribs) was created (account 4)
  • 16:09, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . (+1,742)‎ . . N Talk:MU (internet troll) ‎ (Created page with “This person Waller Joel (previously known as MU) did an interview with Roberta Grimes a few years ago […”) (current) (account 3)
  • 16:10, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . Andrew Chung does big chinese SHITs on his back lawn (Created page with “Frank Dickman, Juden Raus, Suarneduj, Grinkagronk, Oo Yun, StudiousBob, TisTRU, Edmundo john, CowardCentral, Wooden Object, Flobbably, BT35, QuintupleTwist, Nam84, Dicky Falla…”) (account 4)
  • 16:14, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . David Gerrard Anglo Pyramidologist Massive POO STUCK DOWN THE LOO (Created page with “The user Open Mind from the skeptiko forum is not MU [86]. I am in agreement that Open Mind is a troll but he is not MU, he has a very different writing style and Open Mind cl…”)  (account 4)
  • 16:10, 18 October 2017 User account Abd Pyramidologist (talk | contribs | block) was created (account 5)
  • 16:16, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . David Gerrard Anglo Pyramidologist Abd (Created page with “Hello gentlemen 🙂 Category:Internet kooks”) (account 5)
  • 16:15, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologists (Created page with “”It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who i…”) (account 5)
    16:13, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . Abd Anglo Pyramids (Created page with “I thought there might be some possibilities here, but the wiki disease is even more established here than elsewhere. I can be reached through the email interface, for the time…”) (account 5)
    16:11, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . Abd Anglo Pyramidologist (Created page with “I am interested in any information on a spiritualist medium or physical mediumship researcher who goes by the name Waller Joel. I have raised this issue before because I suffe…”) (account 5)
  • 16:18, 18 October 2017 User account Abd Eveshi Anglo Pyramidologists Andrew B. Chung (talk | contribs) was created  (account 6)
  • 16:19, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . Abd/Anglo Pyramidologists (Created page with “One of the characteristics of these socks is impersonation of others, so it is always possible that some enemy creates an impersonation sock for them. That should also be kept…”)  (account 6)
  • 16:20, 18 October 2017 User account Abd rules rationalwiki (talk | contribs) was created(account 7)
  • 16:21, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . Anglo Pyramidologist I punch him in the face (Created page with “I slap anglo pyramidologists.”) (account 7)
  • 16:34, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (-813)‎ . . User:Abd ‎ (Undo revision 1884951 by Waller MU Joel Abd (talk))  [Skeptical]
  • 16:35, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Waller MU Joel Abd (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled)  (account 3)
  • 16:38, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Abd Pyramidologist (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) (account 5)
  • 16:42, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+349)‎ . . RationalWiki:Saloon bar ‎ (Sometimes the Onion brushes too close to reality) [“Abd drama” The full discussion. [Skeptical]
  • 16:46, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Abd rules rationalwiki (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) (account 7)
  • 16:47, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Abd Eveshi Anglo Pyramidologists Andrew B. Chung (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) [talk page blocked 16:59, 18 October 2017)  (account 6)
  • 16:47, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Andrew B. Chung dirty old bloke from china (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) (Harassment) (account 4)
  • 16:58, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Waller Joel MU ANGLO PYRAMIDOLOGIST ROME VIHARO big poo in tiolet stinker dinker (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) (account 1)
  • 16:58, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked ABD ANGLO PYRAMIDOLOGIST BOTH GAY MEN WITH BIG DICKS (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of π×infinity! (account creation disabled) (account 2)
  • 18:04, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist (brush off flies, leave AfD)
  • 18:27, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/User:Abd/Anglo Pyramidologist (→‎Keep: user study, not an article, and useful for considerations of site maintenance. Maybe it’s time for RW to grow up and grow a pair of … checkusers.) [Abd]
  • 18:28, 18 October 2017 Skeptical (talk | contribs) blocked Abd (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of 3.14 months (account creation disabled) (repeated doxxing as well as harassment)
  • 18:36, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+565)‎ . . RationalWiki:Saloon bar ‎ (can you unblock my EmilOWK1 account? [Skeptical]
  • 18:43, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist. . (+174)‎ . . User talk:David Gerard ‎ (Drama) [Skeptical]
  • 18:47, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User talk:Abd [Abd]
  • 18:50, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User talk:Abd (→‎Coop!: format) [Abd]
  • 20:46, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User talk:Abd (link to history as of archiving) [Abd]
  • 20:44, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User talk:Abd (archive to history) [Abd]
  • 20:41, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User talk:Abd (→‎Blocked: massive attempts at coverup are a red flag. That’s all grist for the mill, and the mill is not here.) [Abd]
  • 19:51, 18 October 2017 (diff | hist) . . User talk:Abd (→‎Blocked: thanks again. Ah the sweet air of freedom, by promotion) [Abd]


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress Anti Spam by WP-SpamShield