Talk:Christopher Poole

Sociopath
Why is he considered a sociopath by various people? Can someone please add information about his character in this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.253.186.62 (talk) 16:48, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Naming
Probably due to the antics of 4chan users, there seems to be inconsistent naming in the article. Half the time, Poole is referred to as "moot" and the other half the time as Poole. Someone might want to fix this up.

Beaver225 (talk) 04:31, 28 August 2011 (UTC) I agree, I also think that it should always be moot no every Moot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.48.116.196 (talk) 02:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Calling a guy by a screenname, or whatever he wants to call it, in an entry that is supposed to be encyclopedic is inappropriate.  Moreover, calling him moot when referring to his testimony in federal court is just plain silly.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.141.155.6 (talk) 00:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I vote for naming him 'moot' as this is the name he is most known by in the business; you wouldn't name the 'Lady Gaga' page 'Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta.' These are both pseudonyms but both people are known quite more by the pseudonym, so it wouldn't be totally out of the question. --Kooperfan (talk) 17:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem with changing the page name is that moot is a disambiguation page, and Poole probably isn't the primary usage of the word. That page does give a link to here. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * What do you mean by "in the business"? As far as I know in his professional life (i.e. his various talks, Canv.as, DrawQuest) he's usually referred to as Christopher Poole. The only place he's referred to as moot is 4chan, which is more of a hobby for him than anything, and that one time he did an AMA on Reddit. Also, in the "Impact and Activity" section it cites in the first sentence of the second paragraph a hyperlink entitled "most influential person of 2008 to more info" but the wiki article it links to has no info prior to 2010. 108.28.170.60 (talk) 16:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Poole's age?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2061265/Facebook-rival-Diasporas-founder-Ilya-Zhitomirskiy-dies-22.html this identifies Poole's age when he started 4chan at 15. I don't know if that is accurate (I doubt it), but if it is... that would make him 23 174.6.201.84 (talk) 04:05, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That information is completely accurate. I cannot cite additional sources other than years and years of browsing 4chan. But yeah, they were just little kids back then. 93.163.53.191 (talk) 22:30, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Religion to be added to profile information
In moots own words, he claims himself to be of roman Catholic origin, although not religious at all.

I find this of interest to put in due to numerous claims of moot being Jewish in origin, whilst in fact, he is not.

The comment was quoted from a pinned up topic in the 4chan discussion section, from which moot posts frequently.

 "Just on paper. I was baptized Roman Catholic but never received the Sacrament of Confirmation, and am not religious at all." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.1.93 (talk) 14:37, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That kind of information is appropriate to the page, but we need to be able to cite a source for it, and it's debatable whether a 4chan post would satisfy our sourcing requirements. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:46, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There is an archive of the post on foolz, would that be an appropriate source? http://archive.foolz.us/q/thread/302962/#306975 137.238.117.242 (talk) 19:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think not. That looks like a 4chan post, and we have no way of verifying that whoever made the post was telling the truth or knew what they were talking about. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, it is a 4chan post, but it is without a doubt moot/Poole making the post because he's the only one who can appear as "moot ## Admin". Sure he could be lying, but it's not much different from an interview.137.238.117.242 (talk) 17:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, you are right – that was dumb of me. I've gone back and looked more carefully. At one point moot/Poole says: "I'm more amused that every time I point out I'm Catholic and not Jewish, people then respond with..." followed by stuff I'm not going to reproduce here. Later on, he says: "I was baptized Roman Catholic but never received the Sacrament of Confirmation, and am not religious at all." These are passing comments in a very long thread in which the main subject matter is people complaining about paying and sometimes making antisemitic comments. Given that moot/Poole himself makes it clear that religion isn't an important part of his life, I don't see much encyclopedic value in saying that he was baptized Roman Catholic but is not religious. If there is a secondary source, independent of 4chan, maybe a mainstream news source, that writes about people calling Poole Jewish, then we might have something that would not be WP:UNDUE, but otherwise, I don't see much point. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

moot mentioned again last night in his final Q&A, that he is not Jewish. Due a large amount of people claiming that moot is Jewish (much of the time for antisemitic purpose), this was one of the questions in his final Q&A session that he chose to answer. The Q&A is available as an 8 hour audio recording on YouTube under the title "moot's final 4chan Q&A" and you can find confirmation from him about this at 04:11:55. Because people keep bring it up (as moot says in the audio) and because he chose to address this in the final Q&A, is this not worthy of being documented on Wikipedia? if not only to debunk much of the antisemitic banter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.102.253.11 (talk) 11:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Lawsuit
Calling bullshit on the final line of Impact and activity (referencing [19] and [20]). [20] in particular is clearly rubbish. Would delete it myself but the article's 'protected'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.148.46.55 (talk • contribs) 15:26, September 10, 2013‎

About the lede
In the lede, shouldn't there be a very brief explanation in parentheses explaining what 4chan and Canvas are? Many editors may already know this, but at least a few readers would appreciate it if they didn't have to go look it up.__209.179.93.170 (talk) 00:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Both terms are blue-linked, so it is easy to click through to see what they are. I would worry that any explanation here would end up not being sufficiently brief. --Tryptofish (talk) 15:22, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2014
moot is the worst existence before and after time & space began and ended.

99.34.147.123 (talk) 02:49, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 03:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

'anonymously, under the pseudonym moot'
What happened to the adjective 'pseudonymously'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.6.182.104 (talk) 10:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It just came back. Thanks for pointing this out. It's actually an adverb. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:06, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2014
The articular failed to mention Christipher Poole's work in the industry of Film Making. He was the director of the Hommer Simpson short films. Link to Hommer Simpson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Jh_IxUiW1I https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcaPdQNYnnzE_l0rMtq6qbQ

Vexfriends (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't think producing such an animation would be noteworthy to include. Additionally, are there any sources confirming he did this? Stickee (talk) 01:21, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

7 years and still going by this fake name he gives
He's been in court and yet all the use is this obvious 4chan in-joke fake name. Really odd. I have looked and only found rumors as to his actual name. I'd think being in court he would use his actual name but I guess not. Are you ready for IPv6? (talk) 08:23, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know what you're getting at, but his real name is publicly known. It's the title of the article. His rarely updated personal blog has his first name in the title and gives his full name. StormyTheRabbit (talk) 07:03, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

moot's resignation
See Talk:4chan. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 16:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

moot joined Google/Edit request
He made the announcement in a personal blog post. http://chrishateswriting.com/post/140641275808/my-next-chapter 129.67.173.212 (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

What does he do at Google?
Supposedly he was hired in March 2016 but nobody knows what he does, and he doesn't seem to have posted anything since. Why did they hire him? What does he do? Equinox ◑ 03:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Christopher Poole. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140128155118/http://blog.canv.as/post/74628762928/a-very-important-note-from-team-canvas to http://blog.canv.as/post/74628762928/a-very-important-note-from-team-canvas

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:00, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Christopher Poole. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://blogs.estadao.com.br/link/feio-sujo-e-surreal/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110204192120/http://www.observer.com/2011/tech/creator-4chan-comes-more-mature-canvas to http://www.observer.com/2011/tech/creator-4chan-comes-more-mature-canvas

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:27, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Christopher Poole. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415164347/http://www.buzzfeed.com/reddit/also-the-work-of-4chan-pic to https://www.buzzfeed.com/reddit/also-the-work-of-4chan-pic

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Need help with broken links
Some of the archive.org links got deleted and are no longer valid. I would switch them to the links listed here. In addition to that, https://4chan.org/news now points to the /news/ board, completely unrelated to 4chan news. It should be switched to https://4chan.org/4channews.php

Possible charging for child pornography
Age, name and general location match. I don't want to violate BLP but it would be good if we could confirm this. Mårtensås (talk) 20:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * No mention of 4chan, and the physical description does not match. And where did you get that Moot is living in Utah? I doubt that this is him. Condontdoit296 (talk) 18:06, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This link has his face though. https://getindianews.com/christopher-poole-arrested/ Dorglorg (talk) 09:53, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Just saw this thread, having already removed the content, so to elaborate: That doesn't look like a very reliable source, definitely not the kind that would be above regurgitating some local news pieces on one Christopher Poole while Googling the name and grabbing the image of a notable person with the same name. It happens. When Suge Knight killed someone named Terry Carter, some lower-tier sources reported that he'd killed actor Terry Carter.This is a BLP matter and we need to be absolutely 100% ironclad before saying anything in the article. If it is this Christopher Poole, the world will keep spinning even if we're a bit slow to add it to the article. We're an encyclopedia, not a newswire. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 11:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It is NOT HIM. Bottom right is the person who got arrested. This image comes from the /pol/ thread where users watched this person's livestreamed court appearance to check if it was actually the right Poole. Of course it's /pol/, so language warning. Condontdoit296 (talk) 20:38, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Addition needed to be made to Legal Matters
Christopher Poole was recently charged with 10 counts of sexual exploitation of a minor. This should probably be added to the Legal Matters section 2600:1004:B0A1:8344:84FC:108F:44F:6173 (talk) 01:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and added it. Found multiple sources on Google News. Sad. Iuploadscatpics (talk) 09:17, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

a decision that was met with anger?
(about Poole being hired at Google)

The CNBC article mentions that some Google employees and "industry workers" have criticized the hiring. There is only one link under the word "criticized" that links to an opinion piece by one website, namely, modelviewculture.com (owned by a "Feminist Technology Collective"), that clearly is an opinion website and not a news source.

Since this is only an opinion held by a single individual, who (at least according to the article is not a Google employee), I suggest at the very least changing the sentence to, "a decision that was criticized by some". I do not see any mention of anger in any of the cited sources, let alone from Google employees specifically.

Ideally, I think this part should be removed altogether since the CNBC article is too vague on this; it is not clear who said what exactly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D7YU (talk • contribs) 15:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)