Two Important GamerGate Petitions. Remember – Gawker Proves Emails Work!

The UK Government has an online system for petitioning Parliament. 10,000 votes forces a government response. 100,000 votes forces a Parliamentary debate. GamerGate supporters are running two important Parliamentary e-Petitions submitted by @InvisibleJimBSH .

The first was put in a couple of days ago and has now been counter-signed and approved. It reads –

“Make the ‘Steam’ refund policy the law for all video game digital distribution.

Current regulations treat games as movies when distributed online. Since June, Steam allows buyers to refund a game before 2 hours of play or 2 weeks post delivery, whichever comes first. Bringing consumer protection for games up to a uniform standard for all games services would benefit us all.”

Please sign it here.

The second petition is more controversial, but may be fun for GamerGaters angry with Wikipedia’s treatment of the Gamergate controversy article. In Britain, there is a system called ‘Cleanfeed’ used to block illegal websites like child pornography.

In the past, Wikipedia has actually been blocked for this as reported by the BBC. More recently I reported in my articles, Paedophiles of Wikipedia and Imposter how Wikipedia has poor child protection policies it does not actually appear to follow and has not responded promptly to complaints about links to child pornography on the site.

So the second petition seeks to have them blocked again! Only, more so this time –

“Add Wikipedia to BT Cleanfeed

The website Wikipedia is one of the world’s highest traffic websites and is of use to many people.

However, Wikipedia has also been criticised for holding defamatory content.  Victims of this include Cabinet Ministers, Celebrities as well as political and consumer movements.

Wikipedia has also been criticised for poor child protection policies and a failure to remove editors advocating pro-paedophilia viewpoints and content.”

This second petition only went up today a few hours ago and still needs counter signatures. Please counter-sign it here.


Share Button

Shoulda Listened, Nick! Here is Some More Advice: Time to Fire Sam Biddle

Gawker’s response to its scandalous outing of a corporate executive has been chaotic. It is unclear what strategy the leadership has in place to stop the ongoing haemorrhaging of advertisers. The Witchfinder says that if Gawker wants to clean up its act it is time for  Nick Denton to put Gawker’s house in order. That means reaching out to #GamerGate in a serious and sustained way, covering some socially useful stories and cutting out the cancer at the heart of Gawker Media – it is time for that epitomé of morally bankrupt journalist, Sam Biddle, to go.

In February this year I emailed Nick Denton and Max Read to complain about an article on By Sam F Biddle, it had two major flaws. Firstly, the headling was wildly untrue, far from being a rump of psychopaths GamerGate has continued to grow in size and power. At the time of writing the major forum KotakuInAction now has over 47 thousand members.

Key figures in GamerGate have continued to grow in power, with the fair Shoe0nHead for example now at 77 thousand subscribers, despite her infrequent videos. If June produced say 1-2 videos a week she could monetise and live comfortably – perhaps wealthily – on the advertising revenues.

Secondly the article essentially amounted to picking an … eccentric … from the internet (who later turned out to be a hoaxer) and singling them out, bedlam style, for mockery. The article, like many before it from Sam Biddle, was a disgrace.


Sam F Biddle makes use of stigmatising mental health tropes, singling out a vulnerable individual for ridicule.

Continue reading

Share Button

No Job at Gawker for the Witchfinder – Doxxing is Wrong

The Witchfinder considers some longstanding questions about Wikipedia administrator Gamaliel. Who is he? What is his job?

Recently, after publishing an article exposing the Paedophiles of Wikipedia, I was banned from editing Wikipedia at the behest of Mark Bernstein fan and administrator Gamaliel (the purported reasons are in my previous article). I was initially tempted to do a profile.

I have discovered that Gamaliel is an overweight, 42 year old library technician working at an education institution in the US. I will not say what state. The scope of his ambition appears to be to help readers with their inquiries.  I have also discovered many aggrieved parties lacking the inquisition’s resources who have been unable to determine Gamaliel’s real world identity beyond a name. For example, here and here.

After seeking the advice of friends and struggling between the right choice and the other thing, I have decided not to give Gamaliel’s location, name or real world employer. Or to publish recent pictures. Doxxing is wrong and with moral fibre provided by some kind friends I have summoned the strength to retain the high ground. No job at Gawker for the Witchfinder.

I even did an ethics edit to clarify that a different administrator, acting at Gamaliel’s behest, did the actual block.

[Edit 19/07/2015]

Ultimately your author has decided that we as Wikipedia’s critics need to hold the higher moral ground.

Share Button

Blocked from Editing Wikipedia. For ‘Negative Media Scrutiny’ (over Child Protection) and ‘Satirical Animated GIF’s

A while back I created a sub-reddit called the Great Work. I proposed we work with Wikipedia in good faith. Earlier today I opened an arbitration request about Mark Bernstein’s desire to refer to GamerGate as ‘terrorism’. I got blocked. This, in their own words, is why (archive here) –

“So far, Vordak’s contribution to Wikipedia has been to leave a series of messages which demand that editors and administrators take his preferred actions or face negative media scrutiny, promote his blog via [[User talk:Jimbo Wales]] and Reddit (which has long been a brigading station for Wikipedia edits in this topic area), prominently mention the subject of his complaint in a long blog post about pedophilia while claiming he had absolutely no intention of linking him to such a thing, and running a contest “for the best satirical animated GIF connecting Wikipedia and Paedophilia.” At the conclusion of this matter I will be blocking Vordak as WP:NOTHERE unless he is blocked by the Committee or I am advised by a member of the Committee not to take this action. Gamaliel 17:11, 18 July 2015 (UTC)”

It is true that I said in emails and posts that (for example) if paedophilia is not dealt with then there would be negative media scrutiny. It is also true that I engaged in ‘satire’. At least I have been blocked for something I have done. Gamaliel went on –

“For the record, I support any ethically-sound journalistic, legal, and on-wiki efforts to expose any harmful actions by pedophiles. I do not support prominently mentioning completely unrelated parties in allegedly journalistic efforts that are supposedly about pedophilia but really about your personal agenda, as I find that ethically repugnant.”

This is plainly mendacious. There can be no on-wiki attempts whatsoever to expose paedophiles because the Wikipedia Child Protection policy mandates an immediate, permanent ban for doing any such thing. Gamaliel has been an administrator of Wikipedia since before the policy existed – he knows what it says.

“[…] You should raise your concerns only by email; questions or accusations directed against a particular editor in project space may result in a block for the editor who posted them […]”

I see no reason to appeal. I do not wish to donate my time to Wikipedia.

A while back I said that we should try to engage openly and in good faith with Wikipedia. This has clearly failed. Good faith remains – but no longer with any accommodation for Wikipedia’s unreasonable policies. I am now free to name Wikipedia editors where there is public interest and / or to take legal action if I wish.

[Ethics Update 19/07/2015]

I have seen comment that in fact it was administrator Floquenbeam who blocked my account and I have been insufficiently clear. Whilst this is noted he was only following on from Gamaliel’s intent and shaving off a couple of days so whilst I am happy to clarify it makes little difference. Gamaliel is of interest because he is protecting Mark Bernstein and other administrators follow his lead.

Share Button


The Witchfinder notes some inconsistencies in Wikipedia Administrator Shii‘s statements about his age, and some details about his editing history. Your Inquisitor asks – How old is Shii really? And who is he? This is a brief skit about Shii – there is another much longer exposé about other Wikipedians to come in due course.


Ashi Baka’s age here in this edit made on 10/10/2002 is inconsistent with his later claim to be 17 in 2006. Click for full size.

The BBC3 television show, ‘Monkey Dust’ was a dark, cartoon, comedy sketch show featuring a recurring ensemble cast of characters. One of them, a sinister looking, elderly man known as ‘chatroom pervert’, was an incompetent predator who attempted to meet children online by posing as a 12 year old boy called Benji.

The chatroom pervert regularly failed due to obvious bodges such as (for example) correcting a child’s grammar or by revealing he could not possibly be the age he claimed (by remarking he had been in London during WW2). When dealing with questionable characters online my mind often turns to this sketch and its black, observational comedy.

Continue reading

Share Button

Paedophiles of Wikipedia

The Witchfinder reveals how Wikipedia’s lax policies and laxer enforcement, from the project’s beginning to the present day, create opportunities for paedophiles, their apologists and other sinister denizens of the internet. Questionable characters, even one admitted contact offender, have been allowed to hold administrator roles. Matthew Hopkins News calls on Jimmy Wales to show leadership on the issue or risk being tarnished himself.


Do parents know what sinister forces may be reaching for their children when they visit Wikipedia? Laptop and tentacles image via Dreamstime. Wikipedia logo via CC BY-SA 3.0 and Policy

Modern users of Wikipedia may be unfamiliar with its murky history, for example the appalling and enlightening 2006 ArbCom case entitled, “Pedophilia userbox wheel war” (Archive here). What is a ‘wheel war’?

Continue reading

Share Button