Grant.Alpaugh (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
75.172.195.115 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Richard Rundle (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Chandler (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Tangerines (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Che84 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
CWY2190 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Kingjeff ( talk) 01:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Th problem started is about this edit when the standings went from Wins - Losses - Ties to Wins - Draws - Losses. There has been a lively discussion between myself, user:Grant.Alpaugh and User:Otav347 at 2008 Major League Soccer season Talk page The IP Address listed above just happened to come and did a 4th revert which just happened after user:Grant.Alpaugh 3rd revert. With Grant.Alpaugh being a suspected Sockpuppeteer, I am also suppecting him of voting fraud with at least one of the above mentioned users. Kingjeff ( talk) 01:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
3 out of the 4 edits done for the IP Address were the 4th revert for the 3 templates with the other edit being on another template being used in the same article as the 3 templates with 4 reverts. Kingjeff ( talk) 01:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
After looking at the various events that resulted in the above, I cannot help but come to the conclusion that much of the above report is frivolous. A heated exchange between Kingjeff and Grant.Alpaugh (and others) has taken place at Talk:2008 Major League Soccer season, followed by an evenly split vote, vindicating WP:POLLS by the looks of things. Kingjeff has listed everybody who voted for the option he opposed as sockpuppets, yet at least three of the accounts listed belong to users based on the opposite side of the Atlantic to Grant.Alpaugh. The accusation that the IP is Grant or a meatpuppet of Grant used to circumvent 3RR may have substance, but listing the other users is entirely frivolous. In any case, it takes two to tango. Oldelpaso ( talk) 12:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
How exactly could I be a sockpuppet of Grant.Alpaugh? From their profile they are 22 years old, live in the USA and attend Arizona university. I live in England, in Bispham, Blackpool and am nearly twice their age, and from my edit history it should be perfectly clear that I am English not American. All I did was add my name to the vote and for that I am listed as a suspected sockpuppet? Quite outstanding. I should point out that the only reason I even bothered to vote was because the issue was raised at the WP:FOOTY project which I have been a member of for some time, asking for input. So on that basis anyone who has voted as a result of it being mentioned on that project is a possible sockpuppet? Or is it just anyone who voted the way Kingjeff didn't like is suspected of being a sockpuppet? Sorry but that is ridiculous. And this whole thing is frivilous in the extreme as well as being lazy in that it only takes a minute to check users profiles. Kingjeff only needed to check profiles to see how ridiculous this. "Voting fraud" because the topic was brought up at the Footy project, quite rightly, asking for input? Going round making accusations of suspected sockpuppetry based solely (in my case at least) on the basis of a vote, and a vote because it was brought up on a project, asking for users to vote??? And just to add for any Admins reading this page, this is exactly the sort of thing that could very easily put off users from getting involved in debates such as this, if by doing so then someone comes along and starts making accusations of suspected sockpupettry based solely on a vote in a poll that they don't happen to agree with or like. In addition it any members of the Footy project who were aware of this would be wary of adding their vote to that poll now. ♦Tangerines♦· Talk 14:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Both User:Kingjeff and User:Grant.Alpaugh are still continuing their edit wars today (15th) - three reversions each on each of the Template:2008 MLS standings - Overall, Template:2008 MLS standings - Eastern and Template:2008 MLS standings - Western articles. - fchd ( talk) 04:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure how to refute claims that I'm a "sockpuppet," but...I'm not. I just personally prefer the W-D-L format. I guess my only real evidence that I'm not a sockpuppet is that I've made a truckload of edits over the past year or so, and sockpuppets are usually used for votes, as far as I know. And I'm not sure where Grant.Alpaugh is from, but I can't see him caring enough about my high school (Elmira Free Academy) to edit anything regarding it. Che84 ( talk) 04:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Thank you Alison for the results. My appologies to the innocent users I had to bring into this. Kingjeff ( talk) 16:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The evidence shows a 4th revert on all 3 templates. Not an opinion on which style to use. Kingjeff ( talk) 17:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I think since we have the checkuser results for everyone in question and since it looks like everyone has given their comment, this case could be closed. Kingjeff ( talk) 17:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Please note that I have been 100% upfront about the fact that the IP was my roommate who is on the same IP as me because we share a connection. I asked him to make the change, and he did. So at worst I'm guilty of meatpuppetry, but I didn't know about that policy, and for the record so is Kingjeff. The fact that he brought all of these other users in shows that this was nothing more than a petty, frivilous personal attack on me and the people who disagree with Jeff. Either way, I'm now up to speed on policy, I regret this whole thing, and would like nothing more than to move on to more important matters. -- Grant . Alpaugh 17:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I think a lesson has been learned here. Certainly no one can claim ignorance of the law next time. I also think the parties are being honest here in their statements about this--their tone is diffeent from that of socks who falsely claim they're innocent. PLUS the CU evidence would only support the IP as a possible sock. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Grant.Alpaugh (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
75.172.195.115 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Richard Rundle (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Chandler (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Tangerines (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Che84 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
CWY2190 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
Kingjeff ( talk) 01:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Th problem started is about this edit when the standings went from Wins - Losses - Ties to Wins - Draws - Losses. There has been a lively discussion between myself, user:Grant.Alpaugh and User:Otav347 at 2008 Major League Soccer season Talk page The IP Address listed above just happened to come and did a 4th revert which just happened after user:Grant.Alpaugh 3rd revert. With Grant.Alpaugh being a suspected Sockpuppeteer, I am also suppecting him of voting fraud with at least one of the above mentioned users. Kingjeff ( talk) 01:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
3 out of the 4 edits done for the IP Address were the 4th revert for the 3 templates with the other edit being on another template being used in the same article as the 3 templates with 4 reverts. Kingjeff ( talk) 01:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
After looking at the various events that resulted in the above, I cannot help but come to the conclusion that much of the above report is frivolous. A heated exchange between Kingjeff and Grant.Alpaugh (and others) has taken place at Talk:2008 Major League Soccer season, followed by an evenly split vote, vindicating WP:POLLS by the looks of things. Kingjeff has listed everybody who voted for the option he opposed as sockpuppets, yet at least three of the accounts listed belong to users based on the opposite side of the Atlantic to Grant.Alpaugh. The accusation that the IP is Grant or a meatpuppet of Grant used to circumvent 3RR may have substance, but listing the other users is entirely frivolous. In any case, it takes two to tango. Oldelpaso ( talk) 12:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
How exactly could I be a sockpuppet of Grant.Alpaugh? From their profile they are 22 years old, live in the USA and attend Arizona university. I live in England, in Bispham, Blackpool and am nearly twice their age, and from my edit history it should be perfectly clear that I am English not American. All I did was add my name to the vote and for that I am listed as a suspected sockpuppet? Quite outstanding. I should point out that the only reason I even bothered to vote was because the issue was raised at the WP:FOOTY project which I have been a member of for some time, asking for input. So on that basis anyone who has voted as a result of it being mentioned on that project is a possible sockpuppet? Or is it just anyone who voted the way Kingjeff didn't like is suspected of being a sockpuppet? Sorry but that is ridiculous. And this whole thing is frivilous in the extreme as well as being lazy in that it only takes a minute to check users profiles. Kingjeff only needed to check profiles to see how ridiculous this. "Voting fraud" because the topic was brought up at the Footy project, quite rightly, asking for input? Going round making accusations of suspected sockpuppetry based solely (in my case at least) on the basis of a vote, and a vote because it was brought up on a project, asking for users to vote??? And just to add for any Admins reading this page, this is exactly the sort of thing that could very easily put off users from getting involved in debates such as this, if by doing so then someone comes along and starts making accusations of suspected sockpupettry based solely on a vote in a poll that they don't happen to agree with or like. In addition it any members of the Footy project who were aware of this would be wary of adding their vote to that poll now. ♦Tangerines♦· Talk 14:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Both User:Kingjeff and User:Grant.Alpaugh are still continuing their edit wars today (15th) - three reversions each on each of the Template:2008 MLS standings - Overall, Template:2008 MLS standings - Eastern and Template:2008 MLS standings - Western articles. - fchd ( talk) 04:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure how to refute claims that I'm a "sockpuppet," but...I'm not. I just personally prefer the W-D-L format. I guess my only real evidence that I'm not a sockpuppet is that I've made a truckload of edits over the past year or so, and sockpuppets are usually used for votes, as far as I know. And I'm not sure where Grant.Alpaugh is from, but I can't see him caring enough about my high school (Elmira Free Academy) to edit anything regarding it. Che84 ( talk) 04:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Thank you Alison for the results. My appologies to the innocent users I had to bring into this. Kingjeff ( talk) 16:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
The evidence shows a 4th revert on all 3 templates. Not an opinion on which style to use. Kingjeff ( talk) 17:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I think since we have the checkuser results for everyone in question and since it looks like everyone has given their comment, this case could be closed. Kingjeff ( talk) 17:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Please note that I have been 100% upfront about the fact that the IP was my roommate who is on the same IP as me because we share a connection. I asked him to make the change, and he did. So at worst I'm guilty of meatpuppetry, but I didn't know about that policy, and for the record so is Kingjeff. The fact that he brought all of these other users in shows that this was nothing more than a petty, frivilous personal attack on me and the people who disagree with Jeff. Either way, I'm now up to speed on policy, I regret this whole thing, and would like nothing more than to move on to more important matters. -- Grant . Alpaugh 17:26, 14 May 2008 (UTC) reply
I think a lesson has been learned here. Certainly no one can claim ignorance of the law next time. I also think the parties are being honest here in their statements about this--their tone is diffeent from that of socks who falsely claim they're innocent. PLUS the CU evidence would only support the IP as a possible sock. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC) reply