Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ImprobabilityDrive (talk | contribs) at 20:40, 5 May 2007 (→[]: Adding another link for context of this latest allegation). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:VacuousPoet

Suspected sockpuppeteer

VacuousPoet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

65.73.81.131 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ImprobabilityDrive (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Gnixon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Orangemarlin 18:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Evidence

• All of the IP sockpuppets of VacuousPoet logged on through Frontier Communications, Rochester, NY. Please see Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/VacuousPoet (2nd) for those sockpuppets.
• With this edit, ImprobabilityDrive changed the signature of a uncivil post from 65.73.81.131 to his own, and claimed ownership of the edit, as you can see here.
• As with all of Kdbuffalo's and VacuousPoet's sockpuppet edits, they focus on Creationist/Evolution articles. Please note that there is an RFC filed against ImprobabilityDrive, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/ImprobabilityDrive.
• VacuousPoet is banned for sockpuppetry. here.
• User:Gnixon posted in several of the same articles as ImprobabilityDrive. In fact, Gnixon halted editing in those articles at about the time ImprobabilityDrive began editing , around April 17-19, 2007.
• Checkuser has been filed, but will be revised.

Comments

• Comments of Infinite Improbability Drive: I very much look forward to responding to this latest allegation that I am a sockpuppet, it is the 4th, 5th or 6th such unforunate allegation, and all have been demonstrably false. I have previously been alleged or accused of being sockpuppets of many other users. I was summarily accused and banned as being a sockpuppet of Jason Gastrich for one of these, by Durova, an admin, it is believed, who has summarily banned other new users such as myself, without performing rudimentary searches for negative evidence. This admin, based on an appeal, later reverted the block and then blamed the victim. One possible explaination for why this summary banning route was tried can be found with this post by another admin: here. It is believed, and evidence will be provided, that this is part of a pattern of abusive use of admin powers, sockpuppet allegations, and intimidation by admins and other longstanding users designed to run users who do not hold the POV of article owners. The current allegation is made by a user who has been known to file demonstrably and admittedly false allegations regarding sockpuppetry. I will be adding diffs later bolster this characterization, and reserve the right to modify the present contribution for clarity and accuracy. Regarding the IP, to paraphrase the user who submitted this case, "Uh, frontier in NY is the access point for so many cities that if you used that as a standard of sockpuppetry, we're all up the creek."Not a direct quote, but close. I do not live in New York, and do not wish to disclose where I live. This allegation may be part of a continued pattern in a series of allegations used to intimidate, harrass, invade the privacy of, and block new users instead of assuming good faith. Infinite Improbability Drive 19:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

With regards to Frontier communications. It is a small phone provider in Upstate NY and a few other areas. The DSL IP address points to Rochester, NY. Frontier Communications is just the ISP. Since you are paraphrasing my comment about Wells Fargo, it is a massive banking corporation in a number of states. It does not allow the Whois to point to particular location. Frontier does. Sorry. Orangemarlin 20:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comments of Orangemarlin: Previous sockpuppetry charges against you are irrelevant. You made an error in editing, which showed your IP address, which is the same one as VacuousPoet. If we had known, we would have submitted the right checkuser. Our error, which is now corrected. Orangemarlin 19:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

• Comments of •Jim62sch• : There is no attempt to intimidate anyone here, and as I explained to you previously it is any user's right to request a sock check if he feels it is warranted. Additionally, you are clearly not a new user -- that much is made painfully clear by the sophisticated use of tags, some rather arcane, from the moment you started editing. •Jim62sch• 20:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Conclusions