This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Eleemosynary (talk | contribs) at 01:50, 6 October 2005 (→Sockpuppets of BigDaddy777: new sockpuppet). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is a page for working on Arbitration decisions. It provides for work by Arbitrators and comment by the parties and others. After the analysis of /Evidence here and development of proposed principles, findings of fact, and remedies, please place proposed items you have confidence in on /Proposed decision.

Motions and requests by the parties

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed temporary injunctions

Template

1)

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed final decision

Proposed principles

Template

1) {text of proposed principle}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed findings of fact

Template

1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Sockpuppets of BigDaddy777

1) Suspected sockpuppets include Barneygumble (talk · contribs), LEONARD WATSON (talk · contribs), Paganviking (talk · contribs) editing from 64.154.26.251 (talk · contribs). 67.124.200.240 (talk · contribs) and 216.119.139.77 (talk · contribs) also suspected, see Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Eleemosynary and Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:64.154.26.251.2FUser:67.124.200.240.

Comment by Arbitrators:

1. Results of ip check Fred Bauder 13:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
2. Since dynamic ip addresses are involved it is likely that some of the "suspects" are not BigDaddy777. Analysis of editing patterns is necessary to confirm identity. Fred Bauder 21:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

1. I have used the IP Address 64.154.26.251 to post from. I also post from a dynamic IP Address, which includes a large range under the 216.119.etc. series, including 216.119.139.77. I am not Big Daddy. I have expressed my concerns about sockpuppetry in an incident unknown to me claimed by David Gerard to have used on the first account at . I have never heard of and am not users Paganviking, Barneygumble or LEONARD WATSON. I have never sockpuppeted, i.e. used one account to pretend to address to another I had used. As I have said I have no control and am not the user at the 67.124.etc. series, and is now user:67124etc. I am willing to reveal my general location on a need-to-know basis. I am willing to participate in a large public online chat such as Yahoo Chat with an arbitrator to confirm I am neither Big Daddy nor 67.154.26.251. I am also willing to rehearse some of the contributions I have made over the past two years. Signed 216.119.139.73 09:31, 5 October 2005 (UTC) P.S. To be perfectly clear, by Big Daddy I mean User:BigDaddy777. I have also never seen an edit history item of the 216.119.etc. series that I didn't write. I have never communicated with Big Daddy, except through Misplaced Pages pages. Signed 216.119.139.73 09:49, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
2. I cannot believe that Barneygumble (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of BigDaddy777. They are nothing alike. They have never even edited the same articles. Gumble has been around much longer, first editing on 2005-06-13, while BigDaddy first edited on 2005-09-01. BigDaddy is much more prolific and expresses control-freak behavior on his talk page; Gumble does not seem to have ever done anything like this. BigDaddy can't seem to do anything but make personal attacks; while Gumble might have engaged in this, he seems focused on editing articles. Meanwhile, LEONARD WATSON (talk · contribs) and Paganviking (talk · contribs) have never actually made any edits, so I fail to see how they can be sockpuppets! 64.154.26.251 (talk · contribs) makes real edits that don't sound like anything BigDaddy would ever do such as , has been around peacefully editing articles such as Ann Coulter much longer than BigDaddy , and uses words like "trifecta": . BigDaddy does not use edit summaries the way this guy does and probably never heard the word "trifecta." 67.124.200.240 (talk · contribs) states that he is 67124etc (talk · contribs) and I see no reason not to believe him. While it does appear to me that BigDaddy may have very recently (in the past few hours) started sockpuppetting, this accusation is completely meritless. Jdavidb 14:56, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
3. I am the anon 67.124.200.240 (talk · contribs). Accusations that I am a sockpuppet of user:BigDaddy777 and/or 64.154.26.251 (talk · contribs) are completely false. I should also point out that of the multiple parties involved in the heated Ann Coulter page, only User:Eleemosynary is making the specific claim that I am BigDaddy, and only after participating on the page for barely two days. User:CBDunkerson who has been involved in this ongoing disagreement with me expresses his skepticism here: . Please compare my contributions for yourself, especially the content of my ample participation in discussion. As for innuendo based on edit timing, you try getting edits done when BigDaddy is going at it. Not to add to criticism of him but he gets very involved. Further I'm pretty sure none of my reverts returned to a version of his anyway, I only mainly reverted removal of my own additions or removed disputed additions from others. Except the last few reverts where I defended the other anon from reverts based on accusations of being a sockpuppet, which I continue to consider ridiculous. I will post with the anon IP in a second (edit: verified with this), and by the way am willing to participate in any and every means of verification to debunk these accusations. 67124etc 01:24, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
4. I am a second user, now Viper Daimao, that has edited with the 64.154.26.251 IP. I really dont see the basis for this investigation. A simple google search for this IP address results in over 2,300 hits. It is very clearly and widely used proxy address. So either we are all seperate people as we and others claim, or BD777 actually has 2,300 or so sockpuppets. Furthermore, I can provide much evidence for my unique identity. I have used the monogram "Viper Daimao" for many years now. Again, simply Search google for Viper Daimao to see my history. What I find mystifying is this presumed guilt. Eleemosynary who seems to be the only one bringing the charges talks that all these reasons for all of us not being sock puppets doest not "exonerate" us. This may be my USA bias talking here, but shouldnt the burden of proof be on those who would ban all of us users from this community? --Viper Daimao 01:47, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
5. I would like to put forth evidence that 64.154.26.251 (talk · contribs) aka 216.119.139.73 aka Viper Daimao and 67.124.200.240 (talk · contribs) aka 67124etc are indeed sockpuppets of BD777. As for the other possible user names alleged, I can't really make a determination. I take issue with Jdavidb's assertions that the sockpuppet claims are "meritless." For instance, just because the anonymous IPs' tone and language differ (at times) from BD777's abusive harangues, that is not in itself exonerating evidence. Indeed, one of the more sophisticated uses of sockpuppets is to create allies that sound completely different from the primary user, in order to build a false consensus, and to avoid 3RR violations by switching identities. BD777 himself takes heated issue with Jdavidb's "trifecta" comment .Eleemosynary 01:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Proposed remedies

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Template

1) {text of proposed remedy}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Proposed enforcement

Template

1) {text of proposed enforcement}

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

Analysis of evidence

Place here items of evidence (with diffs) and detailed analysis

Template

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others:

General discussion

Comment by Arbitrators:

Comment by parties:

Comment by others: