Talk:Kevin Martin

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is automatically archived by Pibot
Archives for this talk page: <1>

Contents

[edit] Lawsuit Goodness Added!

I added some goodness, linking to the stupid lawsuit he filed against the government. — Unsigned, by: 75.134.106.166 / talk / contribs

[edit] Cash gifting scheme reborn?

His latest GoFundMe thing [1] solicits "investors" who wish to "double their money" e.g. if you pay him $500 now, in 6 months you get $1000. Mmmmright. Leuders (talk) 21:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Double your money back, guaranteed!! Fortunately it looks like it got shut down. Even a few people in his facebook group where skeptical. Someone earnestly asked him, why he was offering 100% interest when he could just get a loan for a few percent... hmm I wonder why? --Marlow (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Legally problematic postings on this page

[wearing my RMF board member hat] As someone whose problem it actually is to deal with legal threats surrounding RW, I (after discussion with other board members) just revision-deleted some recent discussion and speculation on allegations surrounding Kevin Martin on this talk page. You know we wouldn't do that if it weren't serious. Many of us on RW have opinions about Mr Martin, but we do ask people that they keep things decorous on the topic. We really can't just talk shit on RW about people, even by implication - David Gerard (talk) 18:24, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Full protection for a while

User:John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt just revdeleted some stuff on both the article and talk pages, and fully protected the article. This is a sensible thing to have done, and thank you JJJS - David Gerard (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Cue cries of censorship in 3... 2... 1... 141.134.75.236 (talk) 22:35, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
A probably stupid thought: Should we put up an Template:Editnotice for articles that've been legally iffy before, to remind users that what they say needs solid proof? FuzzyCatTomato (talk/stalk) 00:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
But... but... those poor poor edit summaries! Censorshipz!!!one1! PacWalker 03:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

[edit] Legal threats against Adblock users

Now he's sending Adblock users to shady malvertisers and posting on the Adblock Plus forums about taking the developers of ad-blocking software to court: https://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28581 Julyo (talk) 15:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Not the first to float such ideas, but that isn't the best-reasoned version I've ever seen... PacWalker 15:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
"Our team is already making a program to give the user a virus if they enter with an adblocker." Eyebrow.gif WěǎšěǐǒǐďWeaselly.jpgMethinks it is a Weasel 17:40, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
I've had a Mike Adams lackey tell me that using AdBlock is breaking the law because if I don't give Mike Adams money when I go to his website, I'm literally stealing his content. People seem to get really mad if they start getting less ad money from their bullshit. Frederick♠♣♥♦ 04:49, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support