User talk:Gordy

Please stop spamming Wikipedia with external links to your website. Your contributions are welcome, but please use internal links to Wikipedia articles with double brackets instead. Guanaco 22:44, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As above, please stop replacing internal links with those pointing to your website. Also, direct links to sensitive content such as the video of Bigley's decapitation are to be avoided here. Please be aware that further edits like these may result in a revocation of your editing abilities. -- Hadal 05:11, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Kindly STOP deleting the link to the website which I am posting. This is NOT a beheading video, it is the video of Ken bigley pleading for his life, except that it is the original quality, because unlike the website you seem to favor being listed there (ogrish) it has not been not edited to plaster the website address over it. For your information, there is no Ken Bigley beheading video in the public forum as yet.

Kindly REFRAIN from deleting my EXTERNAL LINK.
Kindly REFRAIN from deleting my external link.

This is NOT a beheading video link I have posted, as you incorrectly presumed. And your comments, both of your, are contrary to your stated objectives, considering that you leave untouched a link to a notorious BEHEADING VIDEO website (aka Ogrish). Now get off my case, before I get on both of yours in ways that will leave you crying and wishing you had never rattled my cage. I have been a member of this site for quite some time now, and have never been guilty of spamming, whilst watching many spammers come and go.

Cyberstalking, which both of you have been doing for the last hour or so with my, is not only a criminal offence, it is further one which gives rise to other remedies, and you're rattling the wrong cage here guys. So be wise, be nice, and get lost. I posted various links ONLY after I observed my original EXTERNAL links having been deleted, and the ogrish links remained. To test the water, I removed the ogirsh link on one occassion and replaced it with my own. I formed the opinion that maybe, just maybe, it was an ogrish associate responsible. Of course, I could be wrong about that very specific detail, but not on others. Now leave me in peace, Im not here to spam, I was posting an OCCASSIONAL link to this website in relevant areas, in the very topics where it belonged, and initially the links WERE in the appropriate external areas, until I observed the peculiar pattern of behaviour reverting back to the ogrish link, so I went on an 'adverture' to fish out who was stalking me nothing more. Now we know what the situation is, hopefully it can be resolved.


 * Self-promotion is frowned upon here, especially when you remove an existing link in the process. Wikipedia is not merely a collection of external links, nor is it a vehicle for advertising or self-promotion. I have had no part in the Bigley article until your arrival; I also have no affiliation with ogrish. As for the "not a beheading" video, I think it's understandable for me to assume that was its contents, when you link it with the one-word descriptor "killed" or "beheaded" (I'm not about to view it either). Regardless, this is not just about Bigley; you added similar links to Nick Berg's and other victims' articles. The word "occasional" to describe your linking doesn't quite fit when one considers both the contributions under your username and those under 62.252.128.16. You may want to peruse Wikiquette and Civility before making any further statements you may regret (see also No personal attacks, No legal threats). Continuing to threaten other users is a good way to get banned. I'll try to overlook your above comments, this time. Happy editing. -- Hadal 06:13, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Self promotion is not what I was about, notwithstanding that it may latterly have given that appearance, although I do believe I explained myself in that matter. Unlike many on here, Im only about 200 miles from Mr Bigley's hometown, just slightly north of it. But in any event, the abundance of posts which you claim to have come from my IP address are absurd in the extremes. I haven't been on wiki for months, and neither has any of my family, and this I can assure you of. I was never aware that that was my IP address anyway, it looks vaguely familiar for the first two blocks of numerals, after this, it's unfamiliar territory. I can only presume that it may be a 'roaming' IP address which is assigned by my ISP, although I never believed that to be the case, as Im on a high bandwidth account, I always believed I had a fixed IP address, with maybe the last block varying. But be assured of one thing, today is the first time I have been on for over six months in an editing capacity, and not much less than that on any capacity. These are not my edits, none of them are. Im not looking to pick a fight, and I couldn't care less if you banned me, I merely presumed someone was messing around with the initial edits I had made, and I was correct, you were that person. From other comments I've seen on your page, you have a peculiar habit of being wikipedia's little hitler, whether or not you are intentionally doing so, or even aware of this perception that other's may form concerning you. As Robert Burns so wisely and poetically once declared, "Ah wa'd the power the giftie gie us, tae see oorselves as others see us". I'm all for freedom of expression and development and furtherance of knowledge for advancement to the good, but one thing that has often left a bad taste in my mouth is the demeanour of another human being with a miniscule modicum of 'power' being bestowed upon them. After this the man, and rationale frequently part company, and an ugly monster takes over. I'm pretty confident you're a sincere person at what you do, and it's NOT a 'powertrip' thing, but more a sincere desire to prevent wiki from falling prey to spammers to the degree that many other networks have. To that intent it may be beneficial to yourself to occasionally refresh yourself with some of these rules that you spontaneously cast at others every now and again, and refelct upon them for yourself, concerning yourself. Take for example, the three reverts rule, and remedies pertinent thereto, like a 'cooling off' for a day period, and see what the other party does. After a period of 24 hours Im sure it would be much easier to form and opinion as to whether a spammer is on the loose, rather than a period of less than 24 minutes, as what was the case on this occassion. There is repeated duplication of links throughout the various 'hostage pages', so duplication isn't particularly an issue here. Possibility that placement of the actual link and choice of linking words were, but even so, that would merely be a case of personal choice or opinion. You say tomato, I say toemato. With a 'cooling period', in this manner I think you would do yourself a greater service, and wiki would ultimately benefit from a man that's just as quick to sit back and look at his own actions instead of spending all of his time observing the actions of other's, for when we fall into this trap the 'speck and the beam' principles of that well known parable can subtely creep up unawares. Don't spoil the good service that I'm sure you ultimately do for wiki.


 * Gordy - you need to calm down. Calling people names like "!Hitler" is not allowed here. Theresa Knott  (The torn steak) 07:08, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I was not CALLING anyone Hitler, I was making an observation in regards to Hadal's 'policing activities of wiki', as someone else termed it previously. I don't think my post was cruel or demeaning of Hadal, as it certainly was not intended to be, merely, again, an observation that Hadal is too quick with his Editing trigger when He personally perceived Editor's comments/editing to be 'inappropriate'. However, I do believe I have EVERY RIGHT to bject when someone has inferred very clearly that I am a spammer, as can be very easily derived from the IP address posted. This could have very serious ramnifications for me and I object VERY STRONGLY TO THIS SLUR on my good internet character. I operate my own servers and networks, and my IP block is on a very busy network. I access my server's, like most people, from Home. I do not use my server for sending out mailing's, e-mails, etc., but rather use my own Home connection, as I have a high bandwidth connection for my business purposes. If someone were to place my IP address on a blacklist, this would have excpetionally serious consequences. Does WIKI have enough money to cater for the legal ramnifictions of this ? I do not think so. And this is NOT a legal threat, it would merely be an inevitable consequence of such an action. I've stated quite clearly that I believe Hadal is a sincere individual, but I further believe that Hadal has a quick 'editing trigger finger'. I placed a very legitimate link on a particular page, and within about TEN MINUTES, it had been altered. I changed it back, and lo and behold, it was immediately deleted. This happened about 2 dozen times within a very short time frame. When I originally placed the EXTERNAL link on the page, I realised that there was a whole load of reference links, so I started a journey through them, which obviously takes time. Had I been LEFT IN PEACE to continue my editing/journey, I would have finished my endeavors in a suitable and appropriate fashion, had I been given the time and opportunity to do this. But my endeavors were constantly frustrated as every time I was referencing and checking back the original page, my link(s) were being deleted. Then I get THREATENED with editing right revocation. If this is the manner in which this network works, fine. If you want to have an exclusive club, where a select few can do what they wish, that is also fine, that may or may not be your rights or pre-rogative on here. JUST MAKE SURE THAT YOU MAKE OTHER PEOPLE AWARE OF THIS BEFORE THEY WASTE THEIR VALUABLE TIME BOTHERING TO EVEN PERUSE OR JOURNEY THROUGH HERE.


 * I did view your link, and this is all I saw:

Goregod.com: Access Denied You are trying to access a restricted area. We are Sorry, but this section of our site is for Registered Users Only. You can register for free by clicking here, then you can access this section without restrictions. Thanks.


 * This is the same link you posted on Nick Berg, Jack Hensley, Eugene Armstrong, and Kenneth Bigley. External links should generally not require registration to view the content, and links are not usually applied like this in the body of the article, which was the way you were adding some of them (the External links section is a better place, but your link still must be useful and in working order).  If an edit is reverted, it is best to contact the user who made the reversion for clarification, instead of continually reinstating your version.  This creates conflict and leads other users to believe that your motives are impure. - MattTM 18:57, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

My motives are impure, LOL, now there's a laugh if ever I heard one. FIRST I'm being told that wiki does not wish a link to the Ken Bigley beheading video, THEN within 12 hours, Lo and BEhold, what does wike have A LINK TO THE KEN BGILEY BEHEADING AT IT'S MOST FAVORED SITE OGRISH. There is clear BIAS here concerning linking processes. The purpose of the NO ACCESS link which you observed at GOREGOD.COM was to prevent access to MINORS. But clearly YOU PREFER a DIRECT LINK TO A VERY GRAPHIC VIDEO ON HERE WHICH ALLOWS ACCESS TO MINORS. Now, I think that is UTTERLY reproachable. NOw, we can take this matter much much farther if you wish, and see whether the majority opinion favors a lin which restricts and regulates access to prevent MINORS accessing a very graphic video, or whether the BIASED opinion from certain editors on here that EVERYONE, INCLUDING MINORS should be able to access this VERY GRAPHIC Video. NOW for the information of those who believe this is my 'PERSONAL LINK/SITE', sorry to disappoint. It IS a site on my networks, owned and operated by a client, this I do not deny, but I like the RESPONSIBLE MANNER in which he RESTRICTS ACCESS to this GRAPHIC MATERIAL. I Also like the FACT that the mainpage contains a WARNING against access to minors or other that would be offened AND, on top of this, THERE IS NO PORNOGRAPHY or other OFFENSIVE links on the client's website, as OPPOSED to the VERY MUCH FAVORED site which keeps getting promoted by certain Wiki editor's. Now, you can call me old fashioned if you wish, but I'm willing to wager that the majority concensus would be a link to a REGULATED, NON OFFENSIVE, NON PORN PROMOTING SITE, as opposed to the site which is repeatedly substituted in an unbelievable manner, for the external link I had replaced, eliminating the OFFENSIVE, PORNOGRAPHY PROMOTING, UNREGULATED SITE which was being promoted. Is this REALLY the kind of website that certain WIKI editors CLEARLY FAVOR promotion of ? An UNREGULATED website which allows UNRESTRICTED ACCESS TO GRAPHIC MATERIAL, and whose main page is littered with PORNOGRAPHY PROMOTING, and NOT JUST ORDINARY EVERYDAY SEX, heck we've even got good old fashioned HORSE BANGING LINKS right on the mainpage, or even the FREE TEEN F$%K. Personally, I've never banged a horse, nor had the inclination to see anyone else do so, nor even promote such stuff, it seems that I'm in the minority here, as clearly certain editor's on eher think that such promotion is fine. Do you REALLY want to take issue with this ? I merely believed I was acting honestly and in a responsible manner, in keeping with the ethos of wiki, maybe I've got the wroing impression, please feel free to correct or enlighten me further. I would certainly be interested to hear more concerning this issue.

Gordy please don't use allcaps. It's considered shouting. I honestly don't know anything about either web site, I have no interest in viewing such videos, but your behaviour here is disturbing. I understand you are upset but you must talk to people nicely. Please assume good faith and act accordingly. Your edits look like self promotion for your website. We get a lot of self promoters here so people are concerned that's all. Perhaps if you stop putting the links back in to the article and simply argue your case politely you will win people round? Theresa Knott (The torn steak) 23:17, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

If you wish to use your website to mirror the video and contribute to Wikipeda, that would be welcome. However, replacing the current links with less useful, inaccessible links, is not. No one is attacking you or your site, and Wikipedia has no affiliation with ogrish.com. However, only the most useful and easily accessible websites should be linked to. Mirrors are almost always welcome, especially for items such as this. If you'd like to help, provide a copy of the video and add it as a mirror link in the article. Thanks. - MattTM 23:27, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

Personally I did not think my behaviour was 'disturbing' as you put it. I did find the manner in which the link was constantly being replaced as disturbing, but I suppose that may be simply a matter of opinion. As for 'good faith', I did not believe anything I did was in bad faith. On the contrary, I believed it to be responsible behaviour. Again, this may be a matter of opinion. What I am surprised concerning, is the degree of 'personal attacks' against me, for substituting, for what in my opinion was an offensive link, for a non-offensive one. This, I find very disturbing. I would be grateful for you clarifying my 'disturbing behaviour', if after re-evaluating you still feel that way. If you mean my objection to someone suggesting that my own personal and business IP address is a spamming address, or perhaps that my beliefs of a direct link to a website which contains unregulated access to graphic material easily available to minors, I would respectfully suggest that I consider this responsible behaviour as opposed to disturbing behaviour. I never came here looking for a fight, and to be perfectly honest, I am stunned at the attitudes being displayed to me simply for changing one link to a non-offensive one. Perhaps we all have different understandings of disturbing. Now please let me empasise that I never at any time came here to spam, pick fights or anything else, but merely to contribute in what I believed was a responsible manner. As a father of five kids (eldest 18), my kids also use the internet on a daily basis. I would be horrified at them getting access freely to a site such as Ogrish. My actions were only honorable and in good faith, and if this has been misunderstood or misrepresented, then I can only apologise that this seemingly simple task has degenerated to this level, but I do not accept responsibility for the fact that it has, nor do I apologise for taking objection to suggestion that my IP address is a spamming address, for all of the reasons already identified by me, namely that I use this for business, and such information, if taken seriously by someone else, could be placed on an IP address Blacklist and seriously affect my business. Clearly this page can be accessed by others, when I actually thought it was my 'private' chat between other users. If you consider this a 'disturbing reaction', then I make no apology whatsoever for this, but neither has it been my intention to offend. On the contrary, I feel greatly aggrieved, but Im sure I'll get over it very quickly if we can all be sensible. Let's hope this unfortunate incident can be quickly done away with, and other's refrain from jumping in and stating my actions/reactions or whatever are 'disturbing'.

As for the comments by Matt, I would be grateful if Matt could explain more fully what you mean by 'mirror'. If you mean a link back to wiki, or something similar, please do clarify what you mean, I'm sure whatever is required could be easily arranged.


 * By mirror, I mean a replica of the original video, which we already have a link to, provided as a supplement in the case that ogrish.com, or whatever other site is used, is unavailable. If this is an issue of whether or not we should be providing direct links to offensive material, that would be best taken up on a more public talk page somewhere (perhaps on one of the beheading victim's pages).  Wikipedia is not a children's encyclopedia, and it contains a good deal of possibly offensive content.  I fail to see how a simple registration requirement to view the video would deter any minors.  Because of this, along with other seemingly promotion edits (example), it was assumed that your motives were not to help make Wikipedia more useful or complete, but to promote your website.  Self-promotion is not allowed, but there are ways you can drive traffic to your site while still staying within Wikipedia's guidelines.  The first step would be providing a copy of the video for download without required registration or any other hassles, and adding a link to it in the article next to the ogrish.com link.  If you have an issue with linking directly to offensive content, even with the proper warnings present, you may wish to discuss it somewhere else (Talk:Kenneth Bigley may be a good place).  In the meantime, I strongly advise you against adding any more links to goregod.com that don't go directly to the proper video.  Doing so will only cause more dispute and reverts. - MattTM 04:34, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)


 * Upon viewing Kenneth Bigley again, I have decided to once again remove the links to goregod.com. If you look at the edit history of the article, you will notice that your edits have a good deal of opposition, and have caused other troubles.  Several users now have found your substituted links to be unsuitable, and have reverted them.  Going against the general consensus to not use the goregod.com link will likely cause more trouble, so please refrain from using it until further discussion on the proper talk pages.  Thank you. - MattTM 04:41, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)

For your information MATT, I already EXPLAINED that the additional links were an endeavor to see who was stalking me. This all happened in a very short time frame, THAT is why I reverted to posting additional links, it was ONLY to see if they would be removed (which by this time the initial external link I placed had been, so I had no doubt something 'sinister' was going on), and check the IP address/user each time it was occassioning. On the other hand, had I been left in PEACE to make my edits, this would NOT have occassioned. However, there is a CLEAR case not only of BIAS on this website, but of ignorant, arrogant PRATS, who accuse people of having 'disturbing attitudes', of being 'spammers' and so forth. I find all of your actions distasteful, rude, arrogant and downright challenging. It would appear to me that there is a band of buddies on here with a 'if your face doesn't fit you can push off attitude', who think they have they right to say what they to you, and if you make any comments back you;re considered beneath them. WHO THE HELL DO YOU PEOPLE THINK YOU ARE ? On the presumption that these 'warnings' and threats I am getting, are coming from official Wiki representatives, kindly provide me with the full legal name and address of wiki owners, because this matter has gone beyond a Joke. First, there is a claim that a 'beheading video' is not welcome, then within 24 hours it suddenly is. personally, I think these pages on your 'ENCYCLOPEDIA' were put on merely to gain webhits on the back of people's deaths, with not a care in the world whatsoever regarding the people. Simply a cheap stunt to get 'hits', and nothing more, so don;t bother trying to preach to me.


 * I have no intention of trying to preach to you. However please note that we do not allow people who make legal threats against wikipedia or wikipedians to edit here. For this reason I have blocked your editing access to this site. The legal owner of this site is the wikipemedia foundation. You can appeal to User:Jimbo Wales him on his talk page if you believe I have acted unfairly. I will of course abide by his decision on this matter. Theresa Knott  (The torn steak) 07:24, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry that was a stupid thing to say. You can email him is what I should have said. Theresa Knott (The torn steak) 07:34, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

So you complain about Theresa? Forget it :O) She's on wikipolice payroll
Hi, I'm irismeister. I see your post has also been cut by Mrs Knott. She must have an addiction for insulting people, censoring and worse. She must have difficulties understanding manners and matters of principle. How about desysoping her first, so that she can concentrate on her legal problems? She already is study material for my team of lawyers, and her lot is pulling Wikipedia into chaos. If Wikipedia can employ her as a brutish force policewoman, Wikipedia will also have to take responsabilities legalwise, because by maintaining her as a sysop or whatever, Wikipedia encourages libel. She is unworthy of adminship, to say the least. She has insulted me in public for one year now, while claiming that I was personally attacking her if I reminded her about the British legislation of libel. She must learn some typing skills, to say nothing about spelling. But, honestly, she draws well, using word processors :O) - irismeister 16:13, 2004 Oct 11 (UTC)