User talk:Lawrence Cohen/Waterboarding arbitration

Maybe, maybe not
I did as you suggested above. I searched 209.221.240.193 and several of the other names. By chance I came upon something that indicates Neutral Good is right about the IP Address being a port for Bosch world-wide.

Here is what I found: This cache from Google shows some sort of query return on requests for some sort of service. Information was recorded on the sender. One of the sources was:

YourCompany: Name: Kbo Cppof Blue Tie note:(Name coded for privacy) Phone: I Prefer to be contacted by email FAX: Email: kboffo.cppof@boschrexroth-us.com Blue Tie note:(email coded for privacy) ServiceDate: 6/3/06 - 6/9/06 Preferred Bus Type: Shuttle Bus ServiceTime: straight through Quote: Submit Request Remote Name: 209.221.240.193 Date: 05 Dec 2006 Time: 15:21:00

Then I looked up boschrexroth. This is a German company. However, it was Boschrexroth-us. Website is here. This company is located in Hoffman Estates, Illinois. Per information above, the IP address is in South Bend, Indiana, which is, per Google Maps 124 miles away. This website says that Bosch Rexroth has 3200 employees in America, divided among 6 locations, 2 of which are close to this IP address.

Here are some other links of interest:
 * This google cache identifies this with not just Boschrexroth but with all Bosch North America, a larger entity.
 * Here we see that the address in question is not just attached to boschrexroth-us.com, but to: http-v.us.bosch.com, substantially widening the domain of potential users of that address.
 * here we see that the address is attached to Novi, Michigan a location not associated with Bosch Rexroth, but with the larger Bosch organization.

Conclusion If the whole German company accesses the US through this port, hundreds of thousands of users would use that IP address.

If only US employees use that address -- the most likely scenario -- then over 18,000 people would use that port.

If only the employees of that Bosch Rexroth use it, there could be 3200 people who might use that address.

If only the employees of the two divisions of Bosch Rexroth use it, it might be about 1/3 of the total or between 1000 and 1100 people who might use that address.

No matter how you cut it, the address is not probative with regard to any particular editor's identity. --Blue Tie (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Wrong. Note the editing history of User:208.250.137.2's talk page. Similar edits happened on other usernames here, here, and here. If 209.221.240.193 were not BryanFromPalatine, why go to the trouble of removing a false notice from some random IP or user pages that said that they belonged to BryanFromPalatine? Google around, as suggested, also. Be sure to search for Hinnen. You'll find the proof. Please don't edit my evidence page directly, thanks. Lawrence Cohen  18:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, Hoffman Estates is a mere 8 miles from Palatine, and a mere 19 miles from Elmhurst. Use common sense. What are the odds of all these random, unrelated, with no connection to each other people from this one suburban corner of Illinois all happening to arrive on a page that is a Conservative hotbed, and one of them just happens to be the Checkuser-confirmed IP address (go look at the old CU--they confirmed 209 was this Bryan fellow), all at the same time? Be serious. Lawrence Cohen 18:46, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Asserting that I am wrong does not make me wrong. The address may be used by thousands of people - Bryan in Palatime might be one, and there are about 18,000 others.  The address is not probative. It just is not.  You are bringing other information in by looking at edit histories.  You see similarities.  Maybe they are there.  Maybe not, I did not check.  I trust you that you see them and maybe you are right. But the address is not probative.  And that is important.  Of thousands of people, it is possible for a few to agree on such things. Maybe not likely but certainly not impossible. But certainly you cannot say "Wrong" to the statement "the address is not probative of identity" and consider that to be a logical, reasonable statement.
 * Too much worry over sockpuppets and user identity and so on, can really get people a bit twisted. Worry about behavior rather than identity. You'll be more relaxed.
 * Incidentally, moving this away from your compilation of "evidence" without a link, is sort of like hiding it. It might have the appearance of bias if it comes up in ARBCOM. --Blue Tie (talk) 18:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it's not like bias, and you're welcome to post anything to your own evidence page. It's considered impolite to manipulate another person's evidence or proposed findings, remedies, and so forth. And I can appreciate your taking your stance to defend someone, but people have been blocked for using the same IPs as consistent troublemakers, with a history of problems (like Palatine). Especially when the "new" people have the same voice, language, and similar interests or leanings. You are welcome to post your own counter evidence when the time comes. Lawrence Cohen  19:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I had no idea that it was impolite, though I was not manipulating your findings. And I absolutely am NOT defending someone. I do not particularly feel that Neutral Good is a good candidate for defense.  But on the other hand, I can see how he might be annoyed by the special attention he has gotten and some people do not respond well to that sort of thing.  As far as BryaninPalatine goes, I have only just vaguely heard of him and know nothing about his issues.  But, I have been on the Internet for more than 20 years and in that time I have faced several cases of people certain that their "sleuthing" had identified who I really am by all sorts of things like IP addresses and so on.  They have NEVER been right, though there errors have been interesting.  When I see people who claim to be misidentified, I can sympathize. Moreover, I recall the people who did this sort of thing to me and they always seemed a bit obsessive.--Blue Tie (talk) 01:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear god, is BFP never, ever going away?
I have to say I am pretty fed up with this, and if we can find a way to make it be in his best interests to depart and never come hence again, like a restraining order, I'd be all for it. --BenBurch (talk) 03:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, and I have his contact information including his work number here somewhere if any admins need it. --BenBurch (talk) 03:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Benburch response

 * I place 76.209.226.118 in the Chicago area in an AT&T IP pool. As a pool IP it probably does not have a single fixed point.  One geo-location service puts it in Carol Steam, IL, in the immediate area of Palatine.  The pattern does indeed sound like Hinnen's. --BenBurch (talk) 05:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The Lake Street address for Chief Enterprises, the Robert Bosch location in Elmhurst is only 2 mies from Carol stream. I drive by there frequently.  I suspect that either 76.209.226.118 is an illegally used open WiFi in that area or represents a WiFi cafe or the Carol Stream public library which has free WiFi.  --BenBurch (talk) 05:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC)