Talk:Crystal Palace (chat site)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on December 13, 2005. The result of the discussion was No consensus. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Contents

[edit] Moved from Protection Request Debate

Notice


Quite the contrary, again. The chat room in question is notable for its long history and for being one of the most popular telnet-based chat rooms for over ten years, which is an eon in the eyes of the internet. Its unique approach to combine both talker-style and MUD style atmospheres made it stand out over the rest and become the popular place it is to this day. 68.83.85.175 22:37, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Just to dispute this. Combining MUD and talker based codes is not unique. The first talker that I could find that did this was Crypt, and indeed a large number of other talkers have done this. Indeed, to be quite technical here, a MUSH or a MOO does this, and they have done this for many years. As for suggestions that it is the most popular telnet-based chat rooms for over ten years, this is not in itself a claim to notoriety, as being "one of", when it has an Alexa rank of over 5,000,000, is not listed on Alexa, Nuts or Ew-too in the top 100 talkers, and is included in a small sample of talker lists suggests that at best it was at one point in the top 10 most popular talkers. Whilst it may well be the most popular BDSM-style talker, even that is in dispute with places like Paradox and Iron Rose, not to mention lintilla and sleepy's dungeons. And that is a pretty small area. I am quite confident that it would fail a vote for deletion, and would be deleted, based on comments and protocol for what an article is required to have in order to be kept. Indeed, during the AFD on PoE, a number of users suggested that Crystal Palace should be deleted instead of PoE, as its claims for notoriety were much smaller. I am happy with either a merge or a delete, but I think that the current spate of vandalism suggests that it should not remain in its own right with the historical elements removed. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 22:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
By the way, there were no personal attacks being made, as was confirmed by a consensus view made by AFD patrons. Facts were presented in as factual and unbiased a method as possible.
I originally created the CP page as part of a project to document the history of talkers, which includes an article on UNaXcess, Cat Chat (talker), Cheesehouse (talker), Foothills (talker), Resort (talker), Surfers (talker), Crossroads (chat site), Ncohafmuta, Lintilla (talker), Fantasia's multiple worlds and Sleepy's multiple worlds as well as Planes of Existence (talker) and Crystal Palace (chat site), and major edits to both Talker and Online chat. The vast majority of these talkers I have never visited, and I created their pages based on historical relevance.
I welcomed these people to improve on the contents of the page, however they have removed all claims to notoriety and vandalised the page, which is something that I would like to discourage. I believe that they have failed to conform to Wikipedia:no original research, and, whilst I have been trying very hard to be diplomatic about things, stating things which are utterly false and not backing them up with evidence is not the spirit of Wikipedia.
I have put on the page in depth why Virus might not have been guilty, and I honestly can't see how it can be viewed as any form of personal attack. The incident very definitely happened, as has been accepted as fact by all of the contributors. The question mark about what precisely happened has already been included in the articles in question.
I think that this is akin to the situation with the vandalising to the Michael Jackson page to try to remove sections about child molestation. Whilst some people think that that was all made up, the reality is that it was an important incident.
I agree that both arguments should be made, however I strongly disagree with removing historical sections just because you dispute them.
I have talked this over with a lot of people and believe that the only sensible result is to delete the page, as all useful content is now contained elsewhere. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 22:40, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, the page has transformed drastically from when it was first created. However, now that it has attracted attention and has been properly shaped, it can stand on its own merit. Nobody has accepted as fact any of the claims you have posted. Your references are nothing but heresay and journal entries that anyone can put together to say anything at all. If any page needs to be deleted, it is Zordrac's laughable Planes Of Existence talkers. The references are nothing but allegations, heresay, rumor, and lies. 68.83.85.175 22:46, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Please provide your own references to support your version of what happened. I have seen nowhere when anyone suggested that these incidents did not happen. If you dispute their very existence, then you should provide evidence for this. I have provided evidence already, and this has already gone through a vote for deletion and passed. I think that using terms such as "laughable" could be perceived to be a personal attack. Anyway, I will let independent persons determine the fate of these pages. As I have said elsewhere, I am happy not to add more to the CP pages, as I have already previously added everything that I was able to reference. The only concern is that recent vandalism and a spate of original research has damaged the page. My recent involvement has purely been to revert vandalism and to try to reach a diplomatic compromise, to ease the pressure from other editors. I think that their edits may be valid, as they included such things as the name "whisper", which I could not source anywhere, as well as adding in the name "acorn" and "exile" and describing in more specific terms what had happened. I think that, if they were to cease vandalising the pages, they could be valid editors.
However, that being said, I think that if Crystal Palace is to be considered to be notable based on user numbers, then the much more popular Snowplains come ahead. It has already been stated that having 11 articles purely on talkers is too many, considering that MUSHes have only 2 and MUDs have only 46, with MOOs only 1. I would suggest that including articles such as this, except in relation to their historical context, is unwarranted. It needs to assert actual historical relevance.
lol... you are contradicting yourself. look below in the talk page for this article, for example. your very words were This chat site is of course notable in its own right as being the most popular of something. BDSM might be a relatively small culture, but being the most popular of its kind, this is notable. Of course, it is the most popular talker. and even And not only that, it was the most popular of its type in the world. Those were your words. I agree with them :) 68.83.85.175 00:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
If they can do that without reference to the controversies then of course it has a right to remain. But I still think that it would be negligent not to mention them, considering their historical importance. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 23:06, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
It's impossible to prove your references as they are nothing but heresay.
You do have a point that pages such as Lintilla, Planes of Existence, Sleepy, Crystal Palace, etc. should not exist. They are honestly not worthy of their own entry. They should all be combined in a Talkers page, not a particular talker(s), such as Planes of Existence. It should be noted that talkers exist, are typically ruled by a feudal/anarchy government, and thus have been subject to countless allegations. Individual allegations should be left out as they are typically only "referenced" by heresay and rumor.

[edit] Removed redirect

There is no point in redirecting crystal palace to planes of existence since they have nothing in common outside of both being talkers.

[edit] Disconnect from POE

Since nothing besides a frivolous allegation links Crystal Palace and Planes of Existence together, there is no need for Crystal Palace to be associated with Planes of Existence. 68.83.85.175 18:01, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV neutralized

I have tried to neutralize the POV while still acknowledging that several allegations were made. It seems petty to include individual instances, as they do nothing but continue old spats that nobody cares about. It is significant to note that allegations have made an impact on people's decision to move away from talkers. 68.83.85.175 02:58, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with this. I think this is a valid and proper approach. -- Shinmawa 10:22, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

"Iron Rose actively supported Crystal Palace with all of its controversies, and vice versa." - Iron Rose has always maintained neutrality and makes every effort to avoid talker wars. We do not "support" controversies at any other talkers. Kim from Iron Rose

[edit] Comments

I talked it over with Virus on Crystal Palace. He provided better details on the Whisper incident and backs up my claim that Virus and Kiwi are not the same person. Of course, it's his word against yours, but there's no way to prove one way or another. I guess it's all speculation and probably not even worthy of wikipedia. 216.158.57.50 16:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Please feel free to edit the pages to conform to a neutral point of view. What we can say with certainty then is that these things were said about Virus, in a definite way. I think that we can agree with that, no? And that the majority of the talker community agrees that they are true. If you wish to put a case that there is speculation that they might not be true, then feel free to do so. Virus, is, however, the same person who Fantasia said hacked her talker, correct? Because that is the Virus that I was talking about here. Kiwi definitely said that he was the Virus from CP and Fantasia's, and so did Fantasia. But determining someone's true identity is something that can never be 100% proven. What we can say however is what was widely believed to be true. If you like, you can put in your opinion about it, until a consensus is reached. I am glad that you are participating in this project. If you can, please can you try to cite your sources, as that makes it easier. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 23:11, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

You have a major misunderstanding: the Virus of Crystal Palace is not the same Virus of Planes of Existence! No matter what the virus of Planes of Existence would have you believe, they are most certainly not the same person. One of particulars about the CP virus is that he frowned on others staffing elsewhere in order to keep his staff devoted to his talkers and thus attracting more people to his talker. Also, the CP virus is very tolerant of all forms of adult life styles. In fact, the only time the CP virus had called the police for a talker-related incident was when he had to stop a suicide after the victim had told virus of the suicide plan. Spying was not involved whatsoever. However, allegations that the CP virus spies on users have always been rampant throughout the talker's history, regardless of its popularity. 216.158.57.50 16:18, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I have now completed the series.

Whilst it could be argued that only this one, lintilla (chat site) and planes of existence (chat site) meet the notoriety requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia, I would argue that, due to their linkages with each other, it is important to also include the less notable sleepy's multiple worlds and fantasia's multiple worlds. This is of course debatable, and if someone believes that it is worthy of merging those two in to lintilla (chat site) then I will not object.

This chat site is of course notable in its own right as being the most popular of something. BDSM might be a relatively small culture, but being the most popular of its kind, this is notable. Of course, it is the most popular talker. There are more popular web-based chats, and so forth in relation to BDSM. Perhaps, sorry, I should have said "most popular free-to-use BDSM talker". This is another one which did used to exist that was more popular, but you paid by the hour for that one (not sure if its still up, and can't remember its name).

The issue of Virus is worth noting too. He is notable primarily due to his influence on computer security, and to his role in convincing people to give up on talkers and move to instant messengers such as ICQ and yahoo messenger. It is debatable whether Virus warrants a page in his own right. I say not. He is notable only as a computer hacker, and has not hacked sufficiently notable things to be worthy of his own page. Hacking some talkers and spying on users is not sufficiently notable. And, as he argued, invading people's privacy on his own talker in order to assist police is not at all illegal. The zoophiles were in fact breaking the law. He was not hacking by doing so, as he owned the talker. However, the issue of him doing that was something that a lot of people found extremely objectionable.

There is the issue of his age. He was allegedly an underage user who created his own adult (18+) chat site while he himself was under the age of 17! And not only that, it was the most popular of its type in the world.

Anyway, I am partially creating this to make sure that the Vfds for lintilla (chat site) and planes of existence (chat site), which currently hang in the balance, both pass. I had intended on waiting until they were passed before creating these, but I felt that it was important to do this now. I think that this would influence the vote in favour of a keep for those 2. Zordrac 22:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay I've realised that I was being a bit narrow with what I was including. I was only including the ones which had cultural impact on the circles that I associated with - the NUTS talkers, and most specifically the adult-orientated ones. So I have now added in the 3 big ew-too ones; Surfers (talker), Resort (talker) and Foothills (talker), as well as other early talkers of historical significance - Cat Chat (talker) and Cheesehouse (talker). Then I added in 2 that were of significant experience to the Nuts angle - Crossroads (chat site) and Ncohafmuta, as well as the first ever adult talker, Lighthouse (chat site), and the whole thing makes sense now.

Irritatingly, Neil Robertson doesn't acknowledge the existence of any 18+ talkers in his history, and so validation is tough. But perhaps that makes this more important - after all, he doesn't recognise a whole chunk of them, which were enormously popular.

I know, Ancient Realms has some claims to fame, but historically I can't justify it. I also noticed that UNaXcess has already been created - what seems to be the first ever talker - one of the intranet ones.

One thing that I've noticed is that I am talking a lot about the two incidents, in 1998 and 2000, with Virus spying. Now, those two were very significant to the whole talker community. However, well first of all he didn't break the law in doing them. But secondly, I haven't yet been able to validate them. However, these are very important things.

It's a bit like saying that "the weapons of mass destruction were the reason for the war". We don't know that they were really the reason - it could have been over oil, over terrorism, or something else. But it can be suggested. And it was significant.

If I get rid of the whole thing about him spying, then this page can't exist.

What we can say, at least, with some certainty, is that NUTS 3 allowed such spying. That is a guarantee. We can secondly say that talkers definitely did fall apart in 2000 or thereabouts - everyone talks about it. The most popular belief is because of ICQ and other instant messengers.

But ICQ had massive security holes. It allowed hackers to take control of your computer, and they could send bombs and so forth. So it wasn't immediately preferred. There had to be a reason why it was preferred, and why the security holes were overlooked. After all, talkers are the most secure form of communication in history - not just the most secure on the internet, but anywhere.

This whole thing is the logical and obvious answer.

Of course, I can remember that happening, and a lot of other people can remember it. I can remember Virus admitting it. I think he put it up on his web page to try to justify it as well, why he thought it was okay to do it. But until I find evidence of that, can I say it?

It has some similarities with the whole Snowtown murders being the inspiration for Wolf Creek (film). Now, Wolf Creek, in the closing credits, says that it was inspired by a murder in 1999. The Australian Crime timeline says that the only major murder in 1999 was Snowtown. Ergo, Snowtown must be what they mean. Secondly, Snowtown had enormous similarities with Wolf Creek, both with the torture and MO and so forth.

And then digging deeper on that one, it turns out that it's true. The movie directors have never publicly said which murder its based on - its just that the media has suggested backpacker murders and even Peter Falconio disappearance. And some have suggested it was "3 of the 8 backpacker murders" when they found out that there were 3. So its logical and obvious that it meant Snowtown.

Of course, on a technicality, Snowtown wasn't in 1999, it was 1992-99 - it was just brought to public attention in 1999, henceforth it would be logical for someone to refer to it as 1999, just like how they'd refer to backpackers as 1992.

And so this has some similarities with that assertion. Here we have a missing hole. We know that ICQ wasn't dragging people from talkers initially - most people were using both, or else avoiding ICQ because of lack of security. There had to be something else, and this is it.

So even if I didn't know for myself that this was the answer, I'd have guessed it. And you've got the holes in the NUTS 3 code and so forth. Plus of course the whole controversy about Virus hacking Fantasia's place, and taking over Planes, both of which are well publicised.

What Virus really did is speculation. Was he really blackmailing zoophiles or were they just saying that as part of the hatred by zoos against BDSM folks? How much information did he really get a hold of? What was his real purpose behind doing it?

But the reality is that, one way or the other, people thought that he was spying, NUTS 3 allows spying, and that was said to be the main reason why people left talkers in favour of ICQ. And you can't talk about talkers in an accurate fashion and not mention that.

Henceforth I have to include that.

I know that without better links it hypothetically counts as "original research" but thats beside the point. It could be searched for and found. Its just a matter of whether I have that much time, to find such a thing. I tried the WayBackWhen machine but Crystal Palace's webpage name seems to have changed a few times since then so its not there - and whether it was listed on the web is another matter. These were talkers. They were not web pages. Therefore using google isn't going to help much in finding information about them. That kind of thing would have been stored internally, on message boards and the like. Zordrac 21:14, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Virus

I am very happy that a number of people have taken interest in this project, and I welcome their contributions. I think that we can help to make this as accurate as possible a project.

The issue about the various controversies surrounding Virus (hacking of Fantasia's talker, spying on CP and blackmailing users on PoE) seem to be contentious issues, and I have received threats today in relation to them. So I would like to address these things.

[edit] Hacking of Fantasia's talker

Fantasia banned Virus, and then immediately afterwards her talker did not function for a period of 1 week. This is an established fact, which I am sure we all agree on. Secondly, it is an established fact that Fantasia told everyone that the reason for the ban was because Virus was underage. I have heard no dispute of this. Thirdly, it is an established fact that Fantasia told "everyone" that Virus had hacked her talker, and presented evidence towards this to administrators of similarly themed talkers, including Sleepy's multiple worlds, lintilla (talker), Planes of Existence (talker) and Iron Rose, and that the first 3 of these accepted the facts and on that basis banned Virus from their talker. And it is an established fact that as a result of these actions, Virus, who is the same person that runs Crystal Palace today, was widely believed to be responsible for hacking Fantasia's talker. What we cannot establish, at least not with the evidence thus far available, is whether or not he really did hack her talker. Short of contacting Fantasia, I don't see how we can get that evidence, since she seems to be the only person that held it. So we will leave that as a claim of significant relevance towards everything else.

[edit] Virus spying on CP

It is an established fact that Whisper was accused by Virus of spying on users on Lo Riveiro, and that she in retaliation accused Virus of spying on users, and that he shut the talker down to hide the evidence. We can all agree to this, yes? We can also agree that at the time, Virus had a very bad reputation and was believed to be a computer hacker (not the least because of his choice of nickname). And we can agree that outside of the BDSM community, the wider talker community believed Whisper's story. We can also accept that this was one of a large number of allegations of spying against Crystal Palace and Virus, and that, in the context of the other allegations, this was seen by many as effectively evidence that he had done it. But what we can't say is whether he actually did. As far as I know, the only person who can prove whether he did or not is in fact Virus himself. Since he has a vested interest not to disclose it, I suspect that there will never be hard evidence either way. Therefore, what we can say (and already have said) is that he was accused of it. Without evidence to disprove it, we cannot say that it is false either. We can say that it is an allegation. We are all in agreement that it radically affected the opinion of talkers, yes?

[edit] Virus being Kiwi

It is an established fact that Kiwi was believed to be Virus when he first used PoE. It is secondly an established fact that Kiwi said that he was Virus as soon as he was granted coder access. It is thirdly an established fact that Kiwi was able to get the code from Crystal Palace to use it on PoE, and that versions of PoE post-1999 looked more like Crystal Palace than they did to the original PoE. It is fourthly an established fact that Kiwi is credited for creating/designing a number of talkers. It is fifthly an established fact that Virus is credited for creating/designing a number of talkers. And we can say that the owners of these talkers regularly referred to him as Kiwi/Virus interchangeably. We can then say that Alisa and Yacko, the owners of talker.com, referred to Kiwi as being Virus, and that they said that he had access to the account virus@talker.com. And we can say that after PoE lost its account, its webpages were temporarily stored on the Crystal Palace web site.

Now, I for one am convinced to a 99.99% probability that they are the same person. However, I am happy to preserve the 0.01% chance that they are not by using words such as "allegedly".

[edit] Virus/Kiwi blackmailing users

I have already addressed this in the article, that it is not a certainty, but is again something with a lot of supporting evidence.

Again, you must remember that telling the police that someone is a zoophile and assisting police with prosecuting an individual is not breaking the law.

[edit] Conclusions

I am convinced that the articles as they stand are not slanderous, and that it is important and relevant to make statements along the lines of the rumours because of their historical importance. I think that it would detract from the quality of the article if they were removed, and that the article would then struggle to conform with the quality required for an article to be kept on wikipedia. The only reason why Crystal Palace has its own article is because of those rumours and their influence on society. If we are to remove the rumours, then this article has no claims to notoriety.

Now, I am most happy for them to be a small little bit at the bottom, and for more neutral terms to be used, to ensure that it cannot be interpreted as slanderous by anyone.

I believe that the current content and how it is displayed already conforms to these ideas.

Now, I have never personally been to Crystal Palace. My only knowledge is of these stories, and their influence on everything else. If you want to contribute to the rest of the article, and perhaps aim to put the claims in to perspective, then feel free to do so. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 00:51, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

So, I guess an appropriate question to ask is why go through the time to spread this nonsense around regarding someone you don't know and a place that you've never been to? You really should get your *facts* straight before you go spouting them randomly. The fact that Crystal Palace is still around, and continues to gather new users daily is testement enough to the integrity of the place. If virus wasn't trusted, and it was of questionable integrity, why would people continue to spend time there? And this whole idea of "blackmail" is just ridiculous altogether.
And for the record Exile isn't based on NUTS, it's 100% original code, not based on any other talker. Next time try writing about something you actually have a clue about, not what you've heard from other people.

[edit] Spying on users

As a former Port Master for virus on the Crystal Palace site, I can say without a doubt that there was no spying involved. I've been on CP since it opened, and was admitted access to the code shortly after it opened as Port Master. After some personality conflicts, I stepped down rather than make a huge issue out of it, meaning that I do not have access to that code today. However, at no time has CP been down long enough to implement new code that would enable any type of spying without any visible differences in the appearance of the talker itself.

-Serax

[edit] Merge

I am considering a merger for all useful content as a sub section of the PoE article, and similarly merging all useful content from Sleepy's and fantasia's in to the lintilla article. Purely for encyclopaedic merit. Crystal Palace in and of itself was not a significant talker, and its only claim to fame lie in the rumours of misconduct that surround it, and their influence on other things. As these rumours are duplicated on PoE, and involve the same people, there is no need for a separate article.

A lot of people here seem to be confusing a statement of fact with a false accusation. It is a statement of fact that these rumours were spread, and that they influenced the wider talker community. Whether the rumours are true or not is up for dispute, and this has been stated in the article.

Whilst I personally don't think that there is any doubt whatsoever that Virus and Kiwi are the same person, while dispute remains, they will be listed as "alleged", as they are at present.

Please could people engage in constructive editing rather than vandalism.

It would be useful if you could add references to back things up as well. I am sure that you have some available. And if you can prove that Kiwi and Virus are not the same person, and prove that Virus did not spy on users, then I will add that to the article. However, that does not necessite a removal of the rumours portion, because it is the rumours which are the important part, in terms of what happened.

I know its a sad fact of life that rumours cause more problems than facts, but that's how things work in this kind of thing.

I think that a lot of people presumed that someone who called themselves "Virus" was a computer hacker, and that this formed a big part of the problem. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 08:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


While I myself have never never been administration at CP, I have however been administration on other bdsm talkers. Leather Lounge, under Archangel (aka Murphy/Dysc) and Mags (aka Stacia/Serena), which was amnuts compatible, did have a spy feature enabled, which I only discovered after it closed. Mags converted Leather Lounge to two other talkers over time, and for the most part, I recall it being dead.

Archangel got his hands on a version of the CP code, or so I was led to believe, from Virus, back in what I believe to have been around 2000. I recall this matter had some discussion behind whether the code was stolen or sold at a high price, in either case it seemed someone was robbed). Archangel and I became the core of a new group called 'House of Chains'[1] which is still online today on the talker.com server using the same, although modified code, CP used 'way back' It is now run by Nightingale and Tag. It did at one time have spy enabled within it, I used it, I played with it on a test port, never in production (This is the acorn code).

This is besides the point. Software does not NEED TO LOOK like it has spy enabled featured, if the rumour begins, it suddenly becomes 'true' in the hands of the right, or wrong users.

CP is popular, and it is growing. In my opinion, people have come to realize that the internet is unsecure in itself, and perhaps they have come not to care. Besides, only those with something to hide really get worried, and make a big deal. Those that worry about spying, simply will not come. Thats my practice from co-administrating a Talker called 'Lara' ([2] / [3]) based on the novels by John Norman of an alternative-earth world called 'Gor'. The high end administrator (Loreanna) regularly (and I have proof, she did this and showed me what she found) read and logged tell buffers, and private room buffers). The talker involved, is now for the most part dead, frequented by few who are favoured by the Lady of the house.

My main point is this, 2000 is ancient news by internet standards, even 2004 is ancient news. While this article is good for nothing else then nostalgia, it does the community no good to dwell on it. CP uses a new code (ground up or not is debatable, look and feel govern my thoughts on the topic). There are a good many decent humans playing in adult 18+ talkers, most minding their own business. Spy code in talkers? please, come on now, lets get on with something new and creative. This argument has been around forever, and god help us, will be with us forever in varying forms.

CP is thriving. Lara is dead.

I can not see how one can thrive, and the other die if they both have spy code in the mix.

-- Logan

[edit] Removed links to other talkers

It goes without saying that several talkers shared common users. 68.83.85.175 21:09, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination.

I've nominated this article for deletion per Wikipedia's AfD process. The (in my opinion) lack of notability meriting an entire article and the growing toxicity of the debate about the article's contents are good reasons for discussing its potential removal.

Comments are most useful at the AfD discussion; things I should personally be aware of can be directed to my talk page.

G'day. Tom Lillis 03:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More keeps than merge. The people have spoken.

The consensus was to not delete. There were more keeps than merges, so the page stays. 216.158.57.50 16:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)