Girth Summit (talk | contribs) Marking request as checked, comment (using spihelper.js) |
Major Dump (talk | contribs) |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 64: | Line 64: | ||
[[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 17:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC) |
[[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 17:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC) |
||
Hi, Major Dump here. Another party alerted me this was going on, so I could defend myself. (The person that started this should have had the courtesy to let me know, whether it's "legally" required or not). PDSLB and Major Dump are both me. I looked it up and saw no rule against that. I forgot my username/password for MajorDump, so created another account, PDSLB. (I forget passwords a lot). Then when I remembered it, I and went back to it. In order to avoid appearance of sockpuppetry, I didn't use both in the same article. I'm not sure, but I don't think I even went back to PDSLB at all after I went back to Major Dump. I would never engage in sockpuppetry. As everyone here knows, I've could have easily reverted each username's edits with both usernames, but never did it. Have never done it. Would never do it, as that's against the rules. (I've even been abiding by the 3RR, for crying out loud) So claims of "sockpuppetry" don't apply here. As far as RJII, the block of RJII doesn't apply to me either. I'm not "RJII." If you somehow come to another conclusion that you have enough reason to block me, please allow me the opportunity to briefly defend myself from that claim before you block me, because if you block me, then I would have no recourse, as I wouldn't be able to type anything in here to show you you're mistaken. That wouldn't be fair. (Or, block me, but let me know how to defend myself afterwards, to get the block overturned, if that's possible). [[User:Major Dump|Major Dump]] ([[User talk:Major Dump|talk]]) 15:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC) |
|||
====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>==== |
====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>==== |
Revision as of 16:01, 10 February 2022
RJII
- RJII (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
09 February 2022
– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.
Suspected sockpuppets
- Major Dump (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Precious delicate sweet little baby (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
Major Dump is an account that had a brief string of edits in the Fall of 2018 and then reappeared a week ago. During these two brief stints, this account has made well over 200 edits, almost all of which constitute an extremely focused effort to insert language about “increased regulation” into articles about fascism –– most of it relentless talk page bludgeoning. While their arguments have not been at all persuasive to others, they do appear to be practiced at Wikilawyering, and at the art of bating (see e.g. this exchange: [1]).
These patterns made me suspect that they are someone’s sockpuppet, and possibly an LTA, so I searched through the archives of fascism-related talk pages for similar themes and discovered the long-term abuser RJII, who fits in numerous ways.
Going way back to 2006, RJII and their socks have been almost entirely focused on editing articles related to big political ideas such as Fascism, Libertarianism, Classical liberalism, Capitalism and Anarchism, and all focus on pushing a right-libertarian POV about limited government versus the purported tyranny of collectivism. They are also characterized by a hyper-focus on a single topic at a time, with a signature style of bludgeoning which is easy to pick out from the crowd of similar POV editors. User:Rick Norwood said it perfectly back in 2010, commenting on a past SPI for this user: Frequent demands for "clarification" or "explanation", but when patient explanations are offered, a repetition of the same demands.
On all of these points, Major Dump is a clear match. Selecting representative diffs took quite some work simply because there are so many to dig through, but see especially:
- Arguing that fascism is primarily defined by an emphasis on control and regulation: [2] (RJII sock User:Introman) versus [3], [4] (Major Dump, just two among many possible diffs).
- Arguing that NPOV requires us to note a purported significant minority of historians who are skeptical that fascism is an exclusively right-wing phenomenon: [5] (RJII sock User:Immoral moralist) versus [6] (Major Dump).
- "Pay attention to what you're doing." [7] (RJII sock User:Can I touch it?) versus "Pay closer attention to what you're doing." [8] (Major Dump)
- Curtly demanding in the imperative voice that others “Justify” / “Explain”: [9] (RJII sock User:Caremerger) versus [10] (Major Dump).
- Editing the same passage in Libertarianism: [11] (RJII sock User:Rapidosity) versus [12] (Major Dump).
- Wikilawyering about the limits of established consensus: [17] (Immoral moralist) versus [18] (Major Dump).
- Claiming that a single reversion proves that there is no consensus: [19] (Rapidosity) versus [20] (Major Dump).
- Stylistically too, RJII and Major Dump appear to share an affinity for using all-caps for emphasis (though on its own this is hardly dispositive), e.g. [21], [22], [23] (RJII socks) versus [24], [25], [26] (Major Dump).
Note that these are just a sampling of diffs. More could certainly be found but this report is already quite long. I’ve also encountered a number of other accounts that look to be a match for this user editing the Fascism talk page during the intervening years, but since they’ve stopped editing I see no reason to over-burden the current case by detailing them.
Finally, note also that the borderline-inappropriate nature of Major Dump’s username is similar to past RJII socks such as User:Can I touch it? and User:All Male Action.
Pinging User:The Four Deuces who filed the previous SPI cases against this user all those years ago, in case they have any additional insight. I haven't requested checkuser because I figured the previously confirmed sockpuppet activity is too old. Many thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 03:05, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Good point about checkuser, TFD (and good catch about RJII's 2005 edit to Talk:Economics of fascism). It might be worth noting as well then that another recently created account, Precious delicate sweet little baby, looks like a DUCK too. They stopped editing on January 31st and Major Dump recommenced on February 1st. See e.g.
- I won't go on since I believe there's already enough there, but more could easily be provided if necessary. It's looking more and more like we are dealing with a rather prolific LTA. Generalrelative (talk) 18:17, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
There is a similarity between Major Dump's discussion at Talk:Fascism and Immoral Moralist at Talk:Fascism/Archive 33. In both cases, the editors argue that some experts say fascism is not right-wing and it is against neutrality to omit this.
- My complaint was that a significant view was being left out, the view that fascism is viewed by a good number of historians to be neither left nor right, i.e. a mixture of left and right, or centrist. Immoral moralist 16:11, 3 February 2010[29]
- It's clearly POV pushing for the article to just state with a straight-face definitively that Fascism IS far right wing, no dispute whatsoever. There are notable scholarly experts (not just extremist non-scholarly sources) that disagree with that, and everybody here knows this. Major Dump 16:11, 2 February 2022[30]
It is also interesting that both RJII and Major Dump joined discussions at Talk:Economics of fascism, which attracts far fewer editors and inserted or sought to insert the view that fascism was characterized by government intervention. Discussion on that page is sporadic, with for example no discussion between 2010 and 2017.
- The definition clearly says economic fascism is an "economic system," and notice it says "heavily regulated." RJII 05:25, 2 December 2005[31]
- Quote from source: "In general terms, the main characteristics of Nazi economic policy were (1) the growth of government fiscal intervention in the German economy through ambitious programs that involved huge public expenditure, and (2) a tightly regulated economy, through more intense restrictions and controls on markets." Major Dump 18:54, 4 February 2022[32]
Also, a check-user might help because in the past RJII has created multiple socks and kept some of them as sleepers.
TFD (talk) 17:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Major Dump here. Another party alerted me this was going on, so I could defend myself. (The person that started this should have had the courtesy to let me know, whether it's "legally" required or not). PDSLB and Major Dump are both me. I looked it up and saw no rule against that. I forgot my username/password for MajorDump, so created another account, PDSLB. (I forget passwords a lot). Then when I remembered it, I and went back to it. In order to avoid appearance of sockpuppetry, I didn't use both in the same article. I'm not sure, but I don't think I even went back to PDSLB at all after I went back to Major Dump. I would never engage in sockpuppetry. As everyone here knows, I've could have easily reverted each username's edits with both usernames, but never did it. Have never done it. Would never do it, as that's against the rules. (I've even been abiding by the 3RR, for crying out loud) So claims of "sockpuppetry" don't apply here. As far as RJII, the block of RJII doesn't apply to me either. I'm not "RJII." If you somehow come to another conclusion that you have enough reason to block me, please allow me the opportunity to briefly defend myself from that claim before you block me, because if you block me, then I would have no recourse, as I wouldn't be able to type anything in here to show you you're mistaken. That wouldn't be fair. (Or, block me, but let me know how to defend myself afterwards, to get the block overturned, if that's possible). Major Dump (talk) 15:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
- One must always be careful distinguishing shared POV from sockpuppetry. The extent to which that is a concern is proportional to the popularity of the POV, and in this case, as minority/fringe views on fascism go, RJII and the two suspected sox share a relatively niche take. The specific focus on the term "regulation", in particular, catches my attention as a bit different from most rhetoric one hears trying to redefine fascism. I am mostly convinced, from what I've read so far, that Major Dump is RJII, and a bit less convinced (but still >50%) that PDSLB is Major Dump. For now I'd like to know what CU has to say about the latter possibility, and will loop back to the RJII question after that. CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk Please compare Major Dump to PDSLB. For evidence, note that PDSLB shares MD's unusal views on consensus and reverts [33] [34], and ctrl+f "regulation" across both of their all-time contribs [35] [36]. See also how often their ESes contain "source"; obviously it's a common term on Wikipedia, but it appears in a whole ~10% of MD's ESes and ~25% of PDSLB's. If there is any useful log data regarding past RJII sox, please compare against that as well, but I'm prepared to handle that side of things on purely behavioral evidence if needed. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:42, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- Tamzin - Major Dump, Precious delicate sweet little baby and Editor Without Bias are all Confirmed to one another. Girth Summit (blether) 09:10, 10 February 2022 (UTC)