Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Rms125a@hotmail.com

An interesting? diversion

After User:McTrumpet added his comment, I, (User:CPMcE) added the following comment, and then struck it out as I had no evidence for the suspicion stated:

Comment I'm sorry, but I have to point out that the above user has practically no edit history (see here), starting just tonight, immediately after the latest "sock-puppet" of Rms disappeared, with unsolicited comments on my talk page, "attacking" Rms and another editor I had a dispute with. I apologise in advance if I am adding 2+2 and getting 5, but I, er, "smell a rat".... Camillus (talk) 00:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I have struck out the above comment, as it may have been too hasty. Camillus (talk) 00:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

McTrumpet replied:

Camillus, I've already addresses this on my talk page. Kindly respond there instead of going around Wikipedia spreading malicious rumours about users.

Your behavour is in clear breach of this Wikipedia policy : Wikipedia:No personal attacks

Kindly confirm that you will cease and desist immediately, or provide evidence to the contary.

--McTrumpet 00:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

MrTrumpet has now created a user page, which I'm afraid amounts to a personal attack on me - re-stating that I am still going round Wikipedia "spreading malicious lies and rumours" about him. I fail to see how one comment on one other article expressing a suspicion amounts to "going around Wikipedia spreading malicious rumours".

If you haven't already died of boredom, please take a look at User_talk:McTrumpet, were I explain why I had my suspicion, and User:McTrumpet. Camillus (talk) 01:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I second that motion. It shows fully how User:CPMcE has taken it upon themselves to launch a personal attack against myself, insinuating that I engage in vanadlism, anonymous edits, and how I am a sock puppet. --McTrumpet 01:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A sample :

at 23:58, User:CPMcE wrote : "I suspected you of being "somebody else", ie. a notorious vandal trying to disguise himself"

at 00:12, 29 March 2006 User:CPMcE wrote : "I'm sorry, but I have to point out that the above user has practically no edit history (see here), starting just tonight, immediately after the latest "sock-puppet" of Rms disappeared, with unsolicited comments on my talk page, "attacking" Rms and another editor I had a dispute with. I apologise in advance if I am adding 2+2 and getting 5, but I, er, "smell a rat".... User:CPMcE"

00:22, 29 March 2006, User:CPMcE wrote : "Perhaps you have been editing anonymously before tonight"

--McTrumpet 01:45, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Forgot this one :

"I strongly suspect it's Mr.Seeger up to his old tricks. What a bore. Camillus (talk) 23:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)" --McTrumpet 01:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Who cares if Camillus is a sockpuppet of RMS? Why don't we all go to Category:Cleanup from March 2006 and spend our time usefully? JackO'Lantern 02:11, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

No! I'm the alleged sock puppet! --McTrumpet 02:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

• Allow me to rephrase, if you will - Who cares if McTrumpet is a sockpuppet of RMS? Why don't we all go to Category:Cleanup from March 2006 and spend our time usefully? JackO'Lantern 02:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Errr, dude! We're Scottish. We don't have anything better to do.

Clean it up by all means dude.

(I don't have to do it myself do I?) --McTrumpet 02:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Well this is something I've been thinking about lately. Aren't we at Wikipedia to improve it/the world/contribute/be productive/etc.? No one out there really cares about RMS, McTrumpet, or me. Why waste time discussing ourselves when we should be discussing/improving the articles? JackO'Lantern 02:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have to admit I have come round to agree with you, JackO'Lantern. Looking at Rms's list of suspected sock-puppets, which is the longest I've ever seen, and given some of his recorded boasts of "more users names to invent, new IPs to use!" (I paraphrase), and given that he'll even pretend to be an "Oirish Catholic", calling Rms an "eedjit", in order to continue his "work", I'm afraid we're stuck with him. Reasonable editors may be open to reform by the community, but I'm afraid that Rms doesn't fall into that category - so, unfortunately, we're stuck with him and his vile propaganda, and his disgusting personal attacks. Still, enough people may have been alerted by this RfC to keep an eye out for his vandalism, so that is a plus. But you're right, there really is no further point to this process. Camillus (talk) 02:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I've changed my mind. I want that last statement by Camillus exactly to be kept where it is.

I'm going to see if theres some sort of dispute resolution policy in place for this.

I'm not having Wikipedia users making personal attacks on me like this.

--McTrumpet 02:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I've listed the page on Wikipedia:Third opinion .--McTrumpet 02:54, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

From WP:3o

This page was listed on Wikipedia:Third Opinion, but I can frankly see no reason why. If you two don't like each other, that's entirely your business. Is there a dispute about an article somewhere here? Fagstein 04:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)