User talk:75.179.159.240

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Username

If you want to hold a conversation please get a username, or at least stick to one IP. -Will Beback · † · 21:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

This account acts likes an IP Sockpuppet of User:Psychohistorian.--JEF 20:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Please don't remove comments posted on this page. If you'd like a talk page of your own get an account, or log into the account you already have. -Will Beback ·:· 22:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
It's quite clear from the contribution records that user:Psychohistorian also uses this IP address. If you're not that user then you may want to get an account of your own so that you have a separate identity. Meanwhile please stop deleting comments intended for this IP address. -Will Beback ·:· 23:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Will is abusing his admin privileges in order to force me to get a named account. He has accussed me of something without even backing it up. Abusive admins should be stripped of their powers. -75.179.159.240 10:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[1]--Ramsey2006 16:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
You already have a username, user:Psychohistorian. By avoiding its use you appear to be trying to hide from your past actions as well as obscuring your current ones. By participating on article talk pages and signing your comments with many different identitites you appear to be distorting consensus. Those are activities that come close to violating our sock puppet guidelines. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
This discussion is also relevant: User talk:MER-C/archives/1#Recent edits to 198.97.67.59. Another admin pointed out the problems caused by your editing under a variety of IP addresses and you agreed to edit using an account name instead. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 01:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand your complaint. I haven't seen you dispute that you're the same user as user:Psychohistorian. If you do dispute it I can provide evidence. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 03:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I can prepare evidence that this and other IPs are being used by the user known as user:Psychohistorian. But if you don't deny it then I don't see a need to go to that effort. It's really quite obvious, based on your contributions, etc. - ·:· Will Beback ·:· 18:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence

Here is evidence that user:Psychohistorian is the same person who edits under various IP addresses:

Given the contribution histories of these accounts there is no doubt that they are the same person. The user has not denied the connection either. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 20:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

All this is is a random collection of IP anons. There's no evidence here. It is just scatter shot. I have not confirmed/denied the accusation because responding to baseless accusations is equivalent to responding to mud slinging - it just spirals into more and more mud slinging. -75.179.159.240 21:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Frankly, I don't like being forced into defending myself against such an unbased argument, but since this admin is intent on violating Wikipedia due process in order to force me to get a named account, I fear I have no choice but to abandon any hope of reasonable treatment in the face of his aggression.

Will believes that by throwing together some random assortment of IP anons and saying "look at the contribution history", that that somehow represents meaningful evidence. I'm a computer programmer by trade, so I like to deal with hard fast evidence, not vague, unverifiable claims of evidence. So, I went and compared two of the above accounts (198.97.67.56 and my own). I do not appreciate having a ton of "evidence" dumped on my user page in the hopes that a scattershot approach to conspiracy building might find -something-, so I restricted my search for the sake of being practical. I looked over the activity of each account over the period of the past month and saw that both were highly active. I looked at common articles and saw that, while I have restricted myself almost exclusively to articles on illegal immigration, less than half of the articles posted by 198.97.67.56 were on the subject. Even more damaging, I saw that 198.97.67.56 is posting from Dayton, OH whereas my own IP traces to Virginia. Again, these are all verifiable facts which anyone can see for themselves. I am striving to retain my cool in the face of Will's baseless accusations because I know that noone will benefit by me expressing my anger. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult for me to do so while having my user page graffitied by his attacks. His "proof" seems to be, as far as I can tell, that edits have been made from both IP anons to articles on illegal immigration subjects which provide an alternative POV to balance the POV he is putting in those articles. He seems to be trying to silence me by bogging me down in dealing with these allegations here. He has ignored Wikipedia due process even after I pointed it out to him. Finally, not only does he claim that I am using multiple IP anons (from different states!), but that "By avoiding its use you appear to be trying to hide from your past actions as well as obscuring your current ones. By participating on article talk pages and signing your comments with many different identitites you appear to be distorting consensus. Those are activities that come close to violating our sock puppet guidelines." -75.179.159.240 22:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

A reminder: this is not "your" user page. It belongs to Wikipedia and is used for communication with this IP address and anyone who has access to it. As for "dumping" a "ton of evidence" you asked me for it so it doesn't make much sense to complain when I've provided some. I still haven't seen you deny the basic assertion that you are the same user as Psychohistorian (PH). As for instigating this, you can see from looking at the top of this page that it was user: Jorfer who made the assertion that you are PH, and that claim was due to editing of an article unrelated to immigration. Ramsey2006, another user who has dealt with PH before, asks, "why the games?"[2] That's a legitimate question. You've repeatedly threatened that you'll bring charges against me for my actions and you're welcome to do so if you feel you have cause. However I expect that any other Wikipedia admin reviewing the evidence would come to the same conclusion as I have. - ·:·Will Beback ·:· 01:00, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
"A reminder: this is not "your" user page." On the contrary, look below where it states, "This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address." I am clearly that anonymous user as is evidenced by the fact that when I type ~~~~ I am identified by the same user tag as appears at the top of this page. "As for "dumping" a 'ton of evidence' you asked me for it" What I asked you for was evidence. What you gave fails all the requirements for evidence - it is not traceable, verifiable, or concise. It is, as I've said, a scattershot dump of data in the mad hope that something will stick. "You've repeatedly threatened that you'll bring charges against me for my actions and you're welcome to do so if you feel you have cause. " I intend to. I just need some time to get the evidence of your abuse together - see, unlike yourself, I know that more than a broad sweep of "look at the contrib history" is required before something can be considered to be -evidence-. -75.179.159.240 02:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
So, are you Psychohistorian or not? ·:·Will Beback ·:· 06:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Can you explain why it is necessary for me to repeat my answer to that question? It offends me that you believe that all you have to do is make some baseless accusation and then it is my responsibility to defend myself against it. I will not stoop to that level of a kangaroo court.-75.179.159.240 10:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
"I am clearly that anonymous user as is evidenced by the fact that when I type ~~~~ I am identified by the same user tag as appears at the top of this page."
A single IP can represent the edits of multiple users. Are you claiming responsibility for the entire edit history of this IP? --Ramsey2006 18:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ACE

Please consider this a polite warning to stop editwarring over the placement of the out of date tag: nothing very much depends on this. You have avoided 3RR by only reverting once a day, but repeated cycles can also be considered as disruption. I am putting the identical comment on the talk p. of the editor who has been reverting in the opposite direction. DGG 01:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did I find you?

Is this Psychohistorian? I've searched for you, but you do not seem to be active? How goes it? Witch hunt still on? Have you invested in a sturdy broom yet?  ;) I've been out - father had a stroke and I was needed there more than I needed Wiki. Chicaneo 07:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)