Re:Wikipedia is an MMORPG
by lemondemon on Saturday September 12, 2020 @10:15PM
(#24457630)
I investigated the story by reading newspaper articles and government documents. I'd like to forget this ever happened, but also would like to serve as a (anonymous internet) warning. Heed it or not, up to you. I don't want to link to the paper trail and wake up any dormant monsters. The "random objects" I also don't describe, in case the objects ring a bell to someone. But you can imagine a door handle or a travel bottle of shampoo.
If you want specifics, I suppose I could mail you those. I fully agree that the account sounds fantastical and psychotic, but it is what I was comfortable sharing. I also think it is a smart tactic if you wanted to discredit someone. I never told anyone close to me either and completely submitted after the article was deleted.
Can you provide a link to one of those newspaper articles or government documents? That would go a long way toward establishing your credibility.
Re:Wikipedia is an MMORPG
by lemondemon on Saturday September 12, 2020 @10:36PM
(#24457740)
Sure, but not publicly. Provide contact.
Re:Wikipedia is an MMORPG
by GauntletWizard on Sunday September 13, 2020 @02:21AM
(#24458823)
I'm going to bite, as well. My pubkey is in keybase from my profile, and my e-mail is on github (or you can just use keybase chat)
Re:Wikipedia is an MMORPG
by OldKnightHunter on Saturday September 12, 2020 @11:16PM
(#24457988)
I'm curious too. [email protected]
I am curious too.
Also an account less than an hour old. GP's post would be a great example for a critical thinking class.
Re:Wikipedia is an MMORPG
by lemondemon on Saturday September 12, 2020 @10:22PM
(#24457659)
I made no secret about using a throwaway.
You allude to a government conspiracy but don't elaborate. You say you investigated this story, but don't describe your investigation (ie. Did you interview victims or did you read blogs online?). You mention this all happened on Wikipedia so presumably there exists some kind of paper trail, but you don't provide any supporting evidence. You describe "random objects" in your mail but don't describe them.
From the reader's perspective this story could be:
1. An unbiased account of a (unnamed) government unfairly wielding their influence over Wikipedia
2. The result of someone upset that their Pizzagate exposé wasn't being taken seriously on Wikipedia
3. An exercise in creative writing
Some kind of supporting evidence would greatly improve your comment.