Wikipedia talk:Suspected sock puppets/Carfiend

Discussion of allegations by Gravitor removed from evidence section

 * Well, the problem is that this is a common tactic used by others on the page:

''Evidence of tag teaming to keep User:Numskll under 3RR.
 * Numskll revert
 * Numskll revert
 * Numskll revert
 * ...wait for it! Wahkeenah revert!

Note that the timing of both these editorial maneuvers is completely coincident. Numskll stops editing at exactly the point where he would be violating 3RR and Wahkeenah comes in and starts making edits that follow Numskll's patterns in an uncanny way.

Note that Numskll and Wahkeenah use almost identical arguments in the discussion. Since they agree with each other, and make 'supporting edits', I am inclined to treat them de facto as meatpuppets, it may be time for the community to act de jure. To be serious, what you've picked out here is a distressing feature of edit wars. You have shown examples of one side of a n edit war, when a user stops editing because of the 3RR war, other users sometimes jump in. This has happened on both sides, as I have shown. It's unfortunate, but it is not evidence that they are the same user. Gravitor 14:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * That argument would carry more weight if all of us were editing on only one subject, and disappearing and reappearing after the same calendar month had elapsed, as Gravitor and Carfiend have repeatedly done. Wahkeenah 14:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The fact is that you are guilty of exactly the same thing that I am accused of. The only difference is that I am trying to resolve content issues on the talk page, while you and yours seem to beleive that if only they can bring enough frivolous and vexatious cases against anyone who disagrees with them, maybe you won't have to. Gravitor 15:00, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The history shows that Gravitor/Carfiend are unwilling to try to reach consensus. Wahkeenah 15:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I can see you're from the "If you fling enough mud, some might stick" school. But the fact is, even if that were true, which I don't believe it is, it has nothing to do with the case in point. The fact is that you have a content dispute with a group of users that you don't like. Well sorry, but you have to deal with that. You can't have people banned for disagreeing with you. Gravitor 15:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)