User talk:Proabivouac
Hi
Hi PB. Good to see you around. Peter Damian 00:26, 11 October 2008 (PDT)
Please fix
Your "error" in your Google docs dated 6th September 2008:
British civil servant impersonated others online
As exposed in my Google docs dated 25th September 2008 (although originally exposed on 8th September 2008 on Encyc):
Correction to British civil servant impersonated others online
Please change this paragraph:
For the sockpuppet account known as Poetlister, Mr. Baxter gives the name Giselle Hillman, purportedly a 26-year old statistician from Ilford. Google gives several hits for a Giselle Hillman which match this description, two papers which credit Ms. Hillman with providing data from the National Transportation Survey,[13] and one site which lists Giselle Veronica Hillman among Ilford County High School's class of 2000.[14] The latter was added by Adrian Meredith, known by the screen name Blissyu2, presumably at the Poetlister alias' request.[15]
To read this:
For the sockpuppet account known as Poetlister, Mr. Baxter was once said to have the real name of Giselle Hillman [12], purportedly a 26-year old statistician from Ilford. Google gives several hits for a Giselle Hillman which match this description, two papers which credit Ms. Hillman with providing data from the National Transportation Survey,[13] and Names Database, a social networking site, which lists Giselle Veronica Hillman among Ilford County High School's class of 2000.[14] [15]
As you can see from the link that you used, it actually says: "Referred by Adrian Meredith". This is not the same as "Written by Adrian Meredith", which you are saying in your document. The inference that you make, based on that, that I created the Giselle Hillman identity on Poetlister's request, is therefore false, and should be retracted. It is a hurtful, nasty, slanderous thing to say which has caused significant damage to me as a person in my real life. It has also led to a number of seriously hurtful things that were said by other people in relation to that, primarily by Alison and SlimVirgin but also by others, on Wikipedia Review, Encyc, Wikipedia and other places, which have also caused significant real life damage.
Whilst I find it completely unbelievable that you could either be unaware that you had made this "mistake" and furthermore that you are unaware that you have been proven false for over a month, I nonetheless am here, for the first time person to person writing you a comment to ask you to please remove this comment. (Note that I have been, since September 8th, trying to contact you with this regards, but every single effort was blocked by people who tried to challenge my right to speak to you! Dozens of people have told me that they spoke to you, but perhaps you can explain why you never got the message?)
As you will see, it does not in any way detract from your investigation. The only difference is that it removes a false aspect that pins the whole thing on me. In other words, if you make the change as suggested, it actually makes you look better, because it makes you look like less of a liar, and it makes it look like your reason for the investigation was to try to prove guilt, rather than just to try to smear my name, which is what it looks like right now.
If you will make the change, coupled with a public apology and some kind of an explanation as to why you were misled to believe that I was in fact responsible for creating the Giselle Hillman identity for Poetlister, then I will also similarly say nicer things about you.
If you don't agree to make the change, I will of course continue to advertise why your article is false, I will indeed call you a liar, and your whole effort, which, other than that element, was probably a pretty good thing, will ultimately end up looking bad on you.
This has gone on long enough, and it is high time that you made things right.
Thank you. Blissyu2 08:39, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
- I am not aware that you ever "proved anything was wrong"…this is the first time you've ever attempted to speak with me about this.
- Put simply, you wish me to delete this sentence:
- “The latter was added by Adrian Meredith, known by the screen name Blissyu2, presumably at the Poetlister alias' request.[15]
- “As you can see from the link that you used, it actually says: "Referred by Adrian Meredith".”
- Yes, I see that. It’s possible that I’d misinterpreted that information, having never used that site. So, explain to me what actually happened, and we’ll correct the record.Proabivouac 14:04, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
- Blissyu2, you write, "Note that I have been, since September 8th, trying to contact you with this regards, but every single effort was blocked by people who tried to challenge my right to speak to you! Dozens of people have told me that they spoke to you, but perhaps you can explain why you never got the message?)"
- Who are these "dozens of people" who told you this? I certainly never heard from them.Proabivouac 16:53, 12 October 2008 (PDT)
- Okay, play dumb then. Indeed, play really stupid.
- Names Database is a social networking site. Classmates.com is a subsidiary of it. I have never actually used Names Database, I only ever signed up to Classmates.com. Try it yourself. When you sign up, it automatically sends an e-mail invitation to everyone on your mailing list from the e-mail address you register with. Guess what? I had been talking to Poetlister, so Poetlister got that e-mail. So, Poetlister is one of about 50 people who are listed as "Referred By Adrian Meredith". Get it? Right. It doesn't mean "Written By". I suppose that it is hypothetically possible for me to have written it, but again, they check IP and e-mail address to verify who you are. They don't check anything else, though. All that you know is that every single entry in that database is using a different IP address and a different e-mail address. There is no guarantee that the "Adrian Meredith" in there is really me, nor is there any guarantee that the "Giselle Hillman" account really belongs to them. It is not reliable. Indeed, nobody who understood what the site was would think that it was reliable. The aim of the site is to try to find ex school friends. I found about a dozen people I used to go to high school with who I had lost contact with. It is a good site. Thanks to your lying article, I was forced to take my name off that. I wasn't too impressed about that. I would love to be able to re-add my name there, but until you fix your lying article, I can't do that.
- You were comprehensively proven to have lied your fucking heart out there. You are still sitting here smiling and refusing to change it. There you go. You can lie and pretend that all of the dozens of people who contacted you oh no secretly didn't. You can pretend that you never saw all of the horrible shit that Alison said about me on Encyc, all of the shit that SlimVirgin said about me on Wikipedia, all of the thousands of things that people said about me BECAUSE OF YOUR LIES! You can lie your heart about that.
- If you honestly think that what you are saying is true, prove it. Put your real name to it, and contact details, so that I can sue you, and we will get a court to decide whether what you are saying is true or not. What you are doing right now is illegal. Daniel Brandt talks about it all of the time. Lying about someone while hiding behind a screen name is illegal by US law.
- You have no reason whatsoever to lie about me in that document. It doesn't help your case - it hurts your case immensely. It makes it look like you are just making shit up as you go along. You know that it is wrong, so fix it. Read up about Captain AmErika if you really are so stupid as to think that you have a right to do this shit. Blissyu2 02:14, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
- Adrian, what is your evidence and reasoning to support your curious theory of mind regarding Proabiv's beliefs, intentions, desires, motivations, or pretensions of knowledge? In particular, please support your as-yet undemonstrated hypothesis that Proabiv was knowingly and intentionally being deceptive rather than merely confused by an incomplete and inchoate account. Have you rigorously employed the protocols of the scientific method to falsify your above-stated hypothesis regarding Proabiv's alleged state of mind? —Moulton 05:22, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
- Whoa, hold on. Just tell me what actually happened with the NamesBase site. That's all I'm asking.Proabivouac 02:17, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
Shut up Alison, you started your shit because of this lie by Proabivouc, who you insisted you had told about my error. Now you are saying that *I* am making up shit about you? Give me strength! The only reason you stopped was because you were scared of the CIA. Proabivouac has now proven that he is guilty of deliberately lying to cause a smear campaign. You, Alison, are an accessory to the crime. Please can both of you give me your contact details, and if you are so fucking sure of yourselves, then bring it to a court of law. Hiding behind an online alias while lying about a real person is a crime. Blissyu2 01:06, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
- Adrian, what is your evidence and reasoning to support your curious theory of mind regarding Alison's fears, motivations or pretensions of knowledge? Have you rigorously employed the protocols of the scientific method to falsify your above-stated hypotheses regarding Alison's alleged states of mind? —Moulton 05:36, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
- Blissyu2, again, please just explain what happened at the NamesBase site, so I can correct the record accordingly.Proabivouac 01:09, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
- Go to http://www.classmates.com/ and sign up. It says to you "Send invites to all of your friends". It even does it automatically out of your address book. Simple. It sends it to all of the people in your address book. I was talking to Poetlister at the time because I was investigating her case, which you well know, hence she got invited. I had no idea that Poetlister had created a profile until you said so a while ago. That was also when I discovered that Names Database now controls Classmates.com. There are about 30 people whose accounts say "Referred By Adrian Meredith". I did not create any of them. If you read their rules, you would have seen that it is impossible to create 2 profiles, because they require you to use a unique IP address and a unique e-mail address. It is however possible to create a fake profile, just so long as you don't have another one. Why do you presume that I would go to so much effort to create a fake profile? If I went to so much effort as that (which would be a huge amount of effort), why would I then show my hand by having it Referred By me? And furthermore, if going to so much effort, why not advertise it? I mean, before you found that spot, nobody had even seen that ever before. It doesn't show up on Google under any search, and if you look through Names Database you get a Canadian Giselle Hillman, who wasn't referred by anyone.
- Sorry, but I am not buying it that you can't figure out something that freaking obvious. Blissyu2 01:12, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
- For what it's worth, I'm having trouble just understanding the puzzle to be solved. It's possible the solution to the puzzle (once clearly stated) is obvious, but the puzzle itself is not sufficiently well stated at this juncture to be clear to me. —Moulton 05:36, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
- Okay, so you invited "Poetlister" to join. Are you saying that this happened automatically when you hit a button saying "send invites to all of your friends"? Are you saying that you had no idea that "Poetlister" would then create a profile after you'd invited "her" to do join?Proabivouac 01:56, 15 October 2008 (PDT)
"The only reason you stopped was because you were scared of the CIA" - I just found this now and can't believe what I'm reading here. What's this about the CIA then, and why are you accusing me of criminal acts here??!! - Alison ❤ 17:24, 5 November 2008 (PST)
Are you still banned from WR?
What was that all about? Emperor 18:28, 13 October 2008 (PDT)
Control of libelous commentary
Tim, I realize your burning desire to attach real names to pseudonymous screen names, and it's a pursuit that I can endorse, but if you are going to do so on MyWikiBiz, you have to do so without unsubstantiated epithets that cannot be interpreted as anything but defamatory. -- MyWikiBiz 18:37, 26 October 2008 (PDT)
- Understood. In fact, I agree with your decision. I didn't print anything libelous, as it happens…but, on its face, neither you nor readers have any way of knowing that, unless you happen to know the Wikipedia history of [User:[pseudonym redacted]. What's needed here is a broader presentation of the way in which this individual has distorted, and continues to distort, Wikipedia's coverage of Israel-related issues in pursuit of a real-world activist agenda. If all the facts are presented, no judgmental qualifiers, however warranted, will be needed: readers will supply them for themselves. I also accept that MyWikiBiz isn't the proper venue for this kind of critical coverage; in my frustration with the partisan censorship on the Review, I have misused my account here, and will cease doing so. Thanks for your guidance in this matter.Proabivouac 19:01, 26 October 2008 (PDT)
- I look forward to good and illustrious exposés, without baseless subjective labels. Thank you for understanding. -- MyWikiBiz 19:24, 26 October 2008 (PDT)
