I have no reason to support Ril, quite the contrary. But the suggestion that User:Melissadolbeer and her various socks are controlled by Ril is patently absurd. -- Doc ^ask? 17:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Why? Why would anyone seriously say you're a sockpuppet of -Ril-? Why did she stop editing in July, and start editing again when -Ril- got indefinitely blocked in august? Furthermore, if she was a real user, why were *all* of her edits during that period about -Ril-? -- Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 03:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Oh, and i forgot to comment...apparently you are a sockpuppet of -Ril-, so we can't believe you. ;) *giggle*. -- Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 05:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Oops. Dmcdevit, who told me about this, let me think that he was telling me that she was Ril. But *now* he tells me she was just stalking him. *shrug*. Still sounds sockpuppety to me. Perhaps an arbitrator could do a checkuser..Dwho and SallyGold are definitely melissadolbeer sockpuppets. -- Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 22:54, 10 March 2006 (UTC) reply

User:Melissadolbeer had a whole network of abusive socks, which warred with Ril over the Authentic Matthew fiasco. After Ril left in September 2005, Authentic Matthew was sorted and Melissa went quiet. But there is some evidence that this user may be back to the old tricks again (although the primary account is dormant). She seems to reappear anytime Ril becomes active. But that is probably due to lurking with a vendetta, she is not Ril's sockpuppet unless he is quite insane (and I see no evidence of that). -- Doc ^ask? 01:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, she seems to have made several socks recently, Dwho ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and SallyGold ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I suppose i was wrong earlier.-- Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 02:42, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

In no particular order, the socks that I am aware of are SallyGold, Dwho, 202.176.97.230, 203.144.210.225, 164.164.127.55, 202.176.184.118, 202.176.97.116, Ghpbermuda, Jlchan, FarSd, Mikefar, Poorman, Goodboy, Teenangel, -Teenangel-, Angel77, -Angel77-, Watcher1, -Watcher1-, -Johnny-, Kendea, Mathman, Paulya. Of these, Poorman and Mikefar made the most attempt to pretend not to be socks. -- Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 17:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

It's my opinion that Melissadolbeer is herself a sockpuppet of a more longstanding user that is part of the community, but doesn't want to associate themselves publicly with her edits. However, I don't really have much of an idea who it might be.

• Bacchiad ( talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) is the only suggestion I can come up with, examining the "what links here" chain from melissadolbeer's postings, and they certainly have an edit history that overlaps with melissadolbeer's (i.e. not being here for a large period of time, and then suddenly re-appearing recently), and seems to edit articles about flaky theories about Christianity. Nevertheless, the small number of edits that Bacchiad makes, and the gaps in the edit history, make it appear that Bacchiad is itself a sockpuppet, so I'm not sure what this would imply. A checkuser on Bacchiad with Melissadolbeer's most recent socks might throw some light on this.

Apart from that, Melissadolbeer's edits are on such a small range of articles, and so very similar to each other, that it is difficult to get much of an idea about what to compare other editors edits to. -- Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 15:27, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

FWIW, I think Ril's thesis here is plausible, although it is also possible that that sockpupperteer simply lurks for months on end. If anyone so enabled is willing, some checkusering about User:Melissadolbeer User:Poorman User:Mikefar and the nexus of blocked socks might yield some results. This is a badly-behaved, highly disruptive and abusive tinfoilhat pov-pusher who has got away with it because the community has focused on the related behaviour of Ril and ignored this.-- Doc ^ask? 15:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Here is Bacchiad's edit pattern over time. It matches Melissadolbeer's rather well (when you take into account the editing of her other sockpuppets). I've asked David Gerard for a checkuser. -- Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 17:29, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

I have a different theory. Melissadolbeer only shows up to quarrel with -Ril-. Either she has some agenda against -Ril-, and is herself a sockpuppet of a troll who has an agenda against -Ril-, or she is an alter ego of -Ril-. My hypothesis for the latter is that -Ril- is the ventriloquist, and Melissadolbeer is the ventriloquist's dummy, a puppet who insults the puppetmaster and engages in personal attacks against the puppetmaster as a performance. In any case, Melissadolbeer and all related puppets should be banned. The ArbCom does not need to decide whether Melissadolbeer is or is not -Ril-. Robert McClenon 16:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Melissadolbeer created Authentic Matthew. I merged what was salvagable from it, and redirected the rest out of existance. She restored it, so I put it up for AFD. During the AFD she created several sockpuppets to protest the vote, flood the vote with huge quotes from the article, and tried to have me RFARed, claiming that Doc Glasgow, JamesGibbon, Fish Supper, Slrubenstien, CheeseDreams, and just about everyone else who voted delete, was a sock puppet of mine. Ever since, she has repeated that claim, copying and pasting various versions of it all over wikipedia. You appear to be doing the same. -- Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 17:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

One theory I would like someone to check is whether Robert McClenon is Melissadolbeer. Call it paranoia, but his attempts to identify her as not being controlled by another user, when it is the most obvious conclusion, strike me as somewhat excessive. And it is certainly the case that Melissadolbeer showed up in the KJV RFAR at about the same time as he did. And it is also the case that Robert McClenon edits in the field of Christianity, notably in similar fields to Bacciad and CheeseDreams (e.g. Bible and reincarnation). -- Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 17:41, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Look, there are real issues in this RfAr, this spurious unevidenced fingerpointing isn't making anyone look very intelligent. Melissadolbeer is certainly not Ril, Bacchiad may be worth a check. But unless someone has some real evidence, let's leave it at that. -- Doc ^ask? 17:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Half this case seems to be accusations of sockpuppetry, so I think it best to make sure that the most likely possibilities are covered. Robert McClenon's edit history suggested the possibility to me - the aggression with which he approaches this RFAR suggests to me a strong vendetta against me beyond the clerks issue, he has an edit history in flaky christian subjects (e.g. Hitler's Pope, Bible and reincarnation, and a noticable dislike of User:CheeseDreams. These facets are shared with Melissadolbeer, and are essentially her prime make-up. In addition he and Melissadolbeer both "discovered" the KJV RFAR involving me at approximately the same time. It strikes me as reasonable to suspect a connection between the two. I may be wrong, but it is the most tangible possibility for a sockpuppeteer of Melissadolbeer, and I am keen to ensure it is investigated fully. -- Victim of signature fascism | There is no cabal 18:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

I have defended you against silly allegations, but now I'm equally going to call this crap too. -- Doc ^ask? 18:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Well, well. That allegation is as stupid as the allegation that I was a sockpuppet of JamesMLane. I don't have a dislike of CheeseDreams, only a knowledge that she is a banned user. I haven't edited at the same time as she has in the same articles. I have a dislike of editors whom I know are disruptive, including -Ril-, and of Internet abusers and Internet trolls. Following the Hitler's Pope case, I also have a dislike of paranoid editors. I discover any RfAr in the old-fashioned way: I watch-list it. Also, -Ril-'s claim that Melissadolbeer and I discovered the KJAR at about the same time itself relies on assumptions. There is no evidence that Melissadolbeer has discovered the KJV RFAR at all. She has not posted since September 2005. A self-identified sockpuppet, Sally Gold, has discovered it, but we only that she is a sockpuppet, and not who her puppetmistress is. Well, well. Robert McClenon 20:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

I recognize that my opinion, that -Ril- is engaged in ventriloquism, is a minority opinion. It is clear that there are a lot of sockpuppets involved here. It is also clear to most of us that certain editors are not sockpuppets. Any allegation that Phroziac, or Doc glasgow, or Robert McClenon is a sockpuppet is just absurd. Robert McClenon 20:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Reconsideration

After reviewing the edit history of Authentic Matthew in more detail, I agree with Doc glasgow that there are two unrelated disruptive editors. Melissadolbeer does appear to have written an article that was "biblecruft", which was then nominated for deletion. It appears that Melissadolbeer and -Ril- do have a few common aspects, such as an inclination to make wild allegations of sockpuppetry. I agree that these are two distinct disruptive editors, both of whom engage in similar behavior, and who appear to have a vendetta against each other. I will not say that Melissadolbeer is a sockpuppet, because she may be a puppetmistress. It is clear that she does change her online identity from time to time. Bad behavior by Melissadolbeer does not warrant bad behavior by -Ril-, and bad behavior by -Ril- does not warrant bad behavior by Melissadolbeer. Also, -Ril-'s original nomination of Authentic Matthew was made in good faith, and it was "biblecruft". Robert McClenon 21:37, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

This reconsideration does not address whether -Ril- is a reincarnation of Cheesedreams, both of whom are vexatious litigants who resort to revenge filings and revenge motions. Robert McClenon 21:37, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

That's what I've been trying to say. Except Authentic Matthew wasn't 'biblecruft' (whatever that means) it was just plain spurious original research. -- Doc ^ask? 22:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Biblecruft means that -Ril- feels it's useless information related to the bible. -- Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 23:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply

Rob, -Ril- is only making wild accusations of sockpuppetry because he's being accused of sockpuppetry and feels the need to retaliate. I don't think he normally does that. -- Phroziac ♥♥♥♥ 23:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC) reply