Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/ED209


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:ED209
The evidence for sockpuppetry in this case is primarily based on two things; While originally these socks were assumed to be part of User:VaughanWatch's retinue, the latest burst of personal attacks has led me to believe that they are in fact a seperate group, who happen to be cooperating with the VW out of convienience.
 * Evidence
 * 1) These sockpuppets emerged either A)In the heat of a revived VaughanWatch debate or B)Right after User:ED209 was blocked for a week.
 * 2) The tone and style of the sockpuppets edits are consistent with (if a bit more extreme than) those of ED209. They are all antagonizing (as ED's have been) and are focussed entirely on me (pm_shef) with some spillover into other users involved in the dispute, notably JamesTeterenko.


 * Suspected Socks

Comment From User:ED209 '' He can't post it here because he's blocked, so I agreed to do it for him. -pm_shef 01:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC) '' This wouldn't be the first time I've been charged with this. However, I suspect when I win this, it will be the last. You are making incredible allegations about me when trying to connect me with these sockpuppets. I am on a cable modem and I am not going to go out of my way to change my IP to hound you. I suspect this is the same user as VaughanWatch. My criticism toward you and your edits have never crossed into the harsh things that these sockpuppets have wrote. Regardless of what you say. Please, start a checkuser on me with all the listed sockpuppets. I would appreciate if you included these comments in that as my evidence in defending myself (I can't right now). I am admitting to have Rogers, which is different than the IP sockpuppets of VaughanWatch, which has Bell. Plus, as I stated earlier, I feel that I have never made the overtly harsh personal attacks such as the ones you've read recently. ED209 00:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Pm shef, please supply evidence of sockpuppet violations, with numerous diffs. Iola k ana |T  12:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't supply diffs originally because all of the suspected socks contribs are evidence. So all of their edits are indicative of what I said above, thus to provide diffs would be the same as just linking to their contribs page. For comparison's sake here are some similar edits by User:ED209;


 * - Clear violation of WP:AGF, has yet to provide evidence to back up the accusations
 * - Posting blatant untruths and acting in bad faith.
 * see edit summary - Antagonistic editing style
 * before registering a username - Antagonistic, personal attack, giving personal info about me.
 * - Violating WP:AGF, personal attacks
 * Personal attack, similar to those made by the suspected socks.


 * If you need more, I can get more. -- pm_shef 23:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * He asked for similiar difs from the sockpuppets that you listed. These edits above appear to have been made in April, from other users. Mangerno 05:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


 * No, they're all made by ED. Some of them were made during the 2-3 month period that he edited as an IP. And I didn't provide diffs from the suspected socks because I said above that all of their edits follow the same pattern, so it would be the same as simply clicking on their contribs link. My evidence here is edit style and pattern of attack, not common reverts. -- pm_shef 22:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: ED209 admits to being and  on the first edit to his talk page.  -- JamesTeterenko 23:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Accounts have been blocked. Iola k ana |T 14:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)