The Four Deuces (talk | contribs) |
Immoral moralist (talk | contribs) |
||
(7 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by accused parties </span>====== |
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by accused parties </span>====== |
||
<small><span style="font-weight:normal">''See [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|Defending yourself against claims]].''</span></small> |
<small><span style="font-weight:normal">''See [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|Defending yourself against claims]].''</span></small> |
||
What's this all about? I'm no sockpuppet! [[User:Immoral moralist|Immoral moralist]] ([[User talk:Immoral moralist|talk]]) 05:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Yes "Can I touch it" is another username of mine. But I point the accusers to Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. It says: "The default position on Wikipedia is that editors who register should edit using one account only. The purpose of this policy is to forbid deceptive or misleading use of multiple accounts and to explain where editors may legitimately use a second (alternate) account. A second account used deceptively in violation of this policy is known as a sock puppet." It doesn't say you MUST use one account only. And note it says "A second account used deceptively in violation of this policy is known as a sock puppet." I've used more than one username and will continue to do so, no matter what happens here, but they're not being used "deceptively." I've had plenty of opportunity to use username to revert back something from another of my usernames, but have never done so. There is no deception. So they're not "sockpuppets." [[User:Immoral moralist|Immoral moralist]] ([[User talk:Immoral moralist|talk]]) 20:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Now I'm done here, and have nothing else to say over this trivial matter. Lots of people on Wikipedia have multiple usernames. If people have nothing better to go around Wikipedia trying to find which usernames may be from the same person, as an excuse for a hobby, that's pretty pathetic. [[User:Immoral moralist|Immoral moralist]] ([[User talk:Immoral moralist|talk]]) 20:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
|||
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by other users </span>====== |
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by other users </span>====== |
||
Line 30: | Line 36: | ||
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>====== |
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>====== |
||
{{clerknote}} except from {{user|Can I touch it?}} all these accounts are {{StaleIP}} and blocked indefinitely. [[User:Spitfire|Spitfire]]<sup>[[User talk:Spitfire|Tally-ho!]]</sup> 08:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC) |
{{clerknote}} except from {{user|Can I touch it?}} all these accounts are {{StaleIP}} and blocked indefinitely. [[User:Spitfire|Spitfire]]<sup>[[User talk:Spitfire|Tally-ho!]]</sup> 08:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC) |
||
:{{confirmed}} that Immoral Moralist and Can I Touch It are the same editor; behavioral analysis should be done on [[User:Jadabocho]] as well. --[[User:Jpgordon|jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|::==( o )]]</small></sup> 20:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
---- |
||
::Yeah Can I Touch it is another I username but that's not sockpuppets, because it's separate articles . A sockpuppet is when you're pretending you're someone else to get around 3RR and things like that. I never use the same name on the same article, because I like having a separate mindset for each article or similar articles. Obviously I've had plenty of opportunity to violate the 3RR secretely with a sockpuppet but it's never happened. My usernames aren't shared in any articles so they're not sockpuppets. [[User:Immoral moralist|Immoral moralist]] ([[User talk:Immoral moralist|talk]]) 20:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:59, 9 February 2010
RJII
- RJII (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date February 6 2010, 03:34 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
- Introman (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Can I touch it? (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Immoral moralist (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Evidence submitted by The Four Deuces
"Can I touch it?" has argued extensively in the Classical liberalism article with other editors. His confrontational style seems similar to "Introman" who was blocked as a suspected sock for "RJII" and made similar edits to the article. The talk pages for both editors show conflict with other editors. Both editors were blocked for edit-warring at Classical liberalism and claimed they were not edit-warring. While the "Can I touch it?" account has existed since 2008, it has been used sporadically and became active again within the last several months. The Four Deuces (talk) 03:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- The style is similar, and the aggressive responses. Its worth a check --Snowded TALK 06:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I have added Immoral moralist (IM). This editor began editing recently only on the Fascism article, an article previously edited by Introman. IM's first edit shows experience and his argumentative style on the talk page, edit-warring on the article page and inserting POV templates as part of his dispute are reasons for suspicion. The Four Deuces (talk) 21:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.
What's this all about? I'm no sockpuppet! Immoral moralist (talk) 05:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes "Can I touch it" is another username of mine. But I point the accusers to Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. It says: "The default position on Wikipedia is that editors who register should edit using one account only. The purpose of this policy is to forbid deceptive or misleading use of multiple accounts and to explain where editors may legitimately use a second (alternate) account. A second account used deceptively in violation of this policy is known as a sock puppet." It doesn't say you MUST use one account only. And note it says "A second account used deceptively in violation of this policy is known as a sock puppet." I've used more than one username and will continue to do so, no matter what happens here, but they're not being used "deceptively." I've had plenty of opportunity to use username to revert back something from another of my usernames, but have never done so. There is no deception. So they're not "sockpuppets." Immoral moralist (talk) 20:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Now I'm done here, and have nothing else to say over this trivial matter. Lots of people on Wikipedia have multiple usernames. If people have nothing better to go around Wikipedia trying to find which usernames may be from the same person, as an excuse for a hobby, that's pretty pathetic. Immoral moralist (talk) 20:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Comments by other users
I have no personal knowledge of this user, but certainly his style is very similar to material written under the name "Introman" and, going further back, to material written under various other user names. Style is a hard thing to pin down, but in this case it includes: frequent insulting remarks, followed by a claim that he never makes insulting remarks. Frequent demands for "clarification" or "explanation", but when patient explanations are offered, a repetition of the same demands. Careless editing (typos not corrected), followed by a demand that other editors should correct his mistakes instead of pointing them out. And, finally, an inclination to argue points ad infinitum, so that discussions on the talk page fill up many pages without ever reaching a conclusion. However, as I said, this is all subjective. My own inclination is to try to ignore editors like this or, if a response seems absolutely necessary, to make it very brief. Rick Norwood (talk) 13:06, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Clerk note: except from Can I touch it? (talk · contribs) all these accounts are Stale and blocked indefinitely. SpitfireTally-ho! 08:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Confirmed that Immoral Moralist and Can I Touch It are the same editor; behavioral analysis should be done on User:Jadabocho as well. --jpgordon::==( o ) 20:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah Can I Touch it is another I username but that's not sockpuppets, because it's separate articles . A sockpuppet is when you're pretending you're someone else to get around 3RR and things like that. I never use the same name on the same article, because I like having a separate mindset for each article or similar articles. Obviously I've had plenty of opportunity to violate the 3RR secretely with a sockpuppet but it's never happened. My usernames aren't shared in any articles so they're not sockpuppets. Immoral moralist (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)