Talk:Beck v. Eiland-Hall

Unsourced change

[1] = this change by Roregan (talk · contribs) is not backed up by the cited source at the end of the sentence. Cirt (talk) 21:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Anonymity

Although not directly applicable to the case, the anonymity of Eiland-Hall is worthy of more than the cursory mention here. Eiland-Hall accidentally left an electronic trail in spite of his anonymous domain registration and efforts to disguise his identity (including his web hosting service and the unmentioned but notable unsigned-but-not-anonymous Wikipedia edit). Once discovered, Hall claimed he was only hosting the website for a client, and that he was not the creator. The article gives the impression that he was initially anonymous, then discovered through legal proceedings, while the real story is more complex. I would think that all this would be worthy of mention, but if there's a reason why it's unmentioned, I'd want to hear it before making changes. Calbaer (talk) 18:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

We would need a WP:RS secondary source to support changes. -- Cirt (talk) 15:31, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Just to clarify: I never have ever edited any wiki entries themselves, although I have talked a couple of times on discussion pages like this one. I just wanted to make sure that's known. I'm pretty sure anyone could go back and look at IP addresses and confirm that. Well, I guess I could have edited a page from outside my home - but I didn't. My most major mistake was setting up the site on my server's main IP address and basically repurposing HTML/CSS from another site. In hindsight.... Also, there was much fun when a certain website tracked me down - someone suggested I edit the 404 for the site and copy/paste Acorn's 404, which I did, which did cause much rampant speculation... hehe. However, although my information was out there, the legal response was what definitely uncovered me - when the WIPO dispute was filed, my options were 1) give in and keep my privacy (theoretically) or 2) respond to WIPO and have my identity out there. I might have gotten away with my story that I was just hosting the site before making the decision to respond to WIPO. Also, I haven't re-read the article in a while... I just periodically check this (well, it's been a few months) - saw that comment and felt compelled to write here. :) Isaac.Eiland-Hall (talk) 05:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Quite interesting, to be sure, but on Wikipedia we must stick to what has been reported on already, in reliable secondary sources - thus remaining an encyclopedic tertiary source. -- Cirt (talk) 06:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)