There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with ![]() ![]() |
RationalWiki:Chicken coop/Archive140
Jonathan Kane[edit]
TLTR - Tetrapteryx is a far-right internet stalker and harasser and writer for the Human Diversity Foundation "Ghost of Lomax" website who should be banned from here because he is actively harassing me off-site. This guy is also a complete coward who doesn't want to go on cam to talk to me. I would like a valid explanation to why he is doing this and why no action as of date has been taken against his account.
Jonathan Kane a far-right banned Wikipedia user [1] is active on RationalWiki on the account Tetrapteryx. His only existence on this website is to stir up trouble about my RationalWiki account and falsely accuse me of being Smith. This conspiracy theory has been proven false. I have offered to meet or go on camera to anyone. Kane never showed up on discord to talk to me over cam.
On his talk-page in a discussion with the user Pinkerite he has made it clear that he was a close friend of Emil Kirkegaard and he has no intention to leave this website until he has got Smith banned [2] and his RationalWiki article deleted. Kane has very strong control over his RationalWiki article which is unlike any other article. If you edit it, he will send an email to Bongolian or Chillpilled and the edits will likely be removed. Kane has many sock-puppets but doesn't want his Quillette account Shuichi Tezuka mentioned.
Kane is the writer of the harassment website "Ghost of Lomax" which promotes misinformation about users RW accounts. The website is currently down but 2 days ago Kane updated it and falsely claimed my RationalWiki account was "nearly" banned. Anyone can see from the coop case this was a lie. 14 users voted against banning me [3]. Instead of quoting the results of the coop case. Kane cherry-picked a single comment claiming I am a meat-puppet. He is not acting in good-faith here and is spreading deliberate harm off-site about my account.
Yesterday the website was taken down so now he is requesting to email RW users some garbage about impersonation accounts [4]. It's obvious the HDF are behind these pathetic impersonations and Kane is the only person obsessed with them. Behind closed doors and emails, Kane will no doubt spread more misinformation that I am somehow behind these accounts.
The backstory to all this, is that Kane is a HBD/race realist pseudoscientist person who was banned on Wikipedia then spent 5 years promoting a crazy conspiracy theory that the Wikipedia user NightHeron is a shared account. He spent years emailing and phoning the WMF about that account but they dismissed his conspiracy theories. Several Wikipedia admins have spoken to me about his harassment campaigns and described him as a "lonely obsessive individual". He has got bored of that user and failed to get them banned, so now I am his latest victim. Basically this guys life is drama about Wikipedia or who owns a RationalWiki account. He is unemployed and will do this all day everyday. It is unproductive but spilling out here. I have also noticed that every-time this user turns up here. Mikemikev creates troll accounts [5], [6]. Kane is in email communication with Kirkegaard and and obviously is "enabling" his friend Mikemikev who he collaborated with on Wikipedia.
From what I have been sent and check outs - the owner of the "Ghost of Lomax" website is a 34 year old unemployed man from Liverpool, UK. He claims to be the "owner" of the website and not the "writer". A police report has been filed against him. Just to clarify the police report was not filed by me but because the Human Diversity Foundation have been harassing me off-site through fake emails, creating impersonations and threatening to ruin my life's work on vegan research and "dox me", it may get to that point. I have emailed the owner of the "Ghost of Lomax" blog requesting for a meet-up or cam call so he can explain why he is doing this harassment. He doesn't reply.
A scan through Kane's RW history [7]. You will see his existence here is to only talk about Smith drama or talk about my account. There are many examples of this going back years. It is not normal editing behavior. He has no constructive edits or other purpose here. This guy is a pest to the website and is actively involved in harassing me off-site so I believe he should be banned here. After Wikipedia banned him he spent a long time pestering Wikipedia administrators with emails. He doesn't give up obsessing over Wiki accounts. This is probably one of the reasons Emily Willoughby dumped him.
As of date, Kane has never disclosed his relationship to the Human Diversity Foundation (he didn't even deny being associated with Ghost of Lomax) when I asked him about it before. Not to be discussed here but I have many examples showing that Kane is definitely writing some of the Ghost of Lomax blog. Off-site, Kane is attacking RationalWiki; it is unclear why he is still being allowed to post here, promote conspiracy theories about peoples accounts or obsess over ridiculous Smith drama.
I am currently drafting off-site a very big article on seed oil misinformation which could bring a lot of traffic to this website. Kane's harassment and trolling is wasting users editing time. He is a pest to the project with an overall negative influence. It is time to remove him from the website or at least put sanctions on his account.
Oldman4 (talk) 13:14, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I was asked to comment here - I do think it's odd, Jonathan Kane's being a RW article and also a RW editor. And it is concerning, his long-time connection to Emil Kirkegaard, who is basically a leader of organized international white supremacy as detailed in the Hope not Hate article Race Science, Inc."
- I do wish some of the charges laid out here were better supported.
- I think it is unwise for any RW editor to dismiss "Oliver Smith drama." Whatever you think of Smith, Kirkegaard has attempted to use his grievance against Smith (which must be primarily due to Kirkegaard owing court-ordered money to Smith,) to attack RW. But Kirkegaard would hate and attack RW regardless of Smith - the RW article on Kirkegaard shows up at the top of search results for "Emil Kirkegaard" which hinders Kirkegaard's wish to have a career as a respected scientist/intellectual.
- Oldman4, I moved your TLTR to the top of this article. Pinkerite (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- We had an article on this arsehole throughout the many years that he was an active editor here. This dick was also an editor here while we had an article about him. I'm pretty sure that Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's time as an editor here partially coincided with time when we had an article about him. So, a RationalWiki editor with a RationalWiki article about them is hardly unprecedented. Spud (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Spud, the difference is that Jonathan Kane has an account here whilst he is actively writing this attack website against me, deliberately confusing my identity with another user and is involved in this HDF harrassment campaign against RationalWiki. It is no secret that he is deeply involved with Kirkegaard and that HDF lot. Bizarrely no RW trustee has questioned or sanctioned him over it and he turns up here every few months requesting to email RW users about my account.
- Abd Lomax did create an entire attack website about RationalWiki but he had already been banned by then. The "Ghost of Lomax" website is dedicated to Abd Lomax. There are only a handful of people in the world who were following all that Lomax drama from 5 years ago. Jonathan Kane and Emil Kirkegaard. There are over 8 billion people in the world and there are less than 5 of these far-right HDF clowns who care about what Wikis I edit. Kane will no doubt turn up here and write 1000s of off-topic comments. I have two simple questions for him - Why is he obsessed with me and why is he spending his entire existence spreading misinformation about my account off-site? What's it going to take to stop this harassment? I am hoping an agreement can be reached because I want to go back to normal editing. Oldman4 (talk) 16:05, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- We had an article on this arsehole throughout the many years that he was an active editor here. This dick was also an editor here while we had an article about him. I'm pretty sure that Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's time as an editor here partially coincided with time when we had an article about him. So, a RationalWiki editor with a RationalWiki article about them is hardly unprecedented. Spud (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- If you look through Kane's contributions, you'll see he's mostly here to discuss drama involving Smith, Kirkegaard, and/or himself. The problem with the Tezuka allegation is, all there is is some coincidences -- that claim was removed from his article because no adequate sourcing could be found to back it up.
- Now we have this whole issue of who writes that website smearing Oldman4 and equating him with Smith (and conflating his activity with that of Mikemikev too). Obviously not a nice experience for Oldman4. It makes sense to ask Kane some questions, and for him to share what it was he was recently wanting to share with moderators. But it's also worth noting the irony with some of this, and the allegations earlier against Oldman4, which were likewise based on a lot of coincidences and circumstances. There we got some evidence showing it was wrong to rush to a conclusion as lots of coincidences were pointed to. (The initial handling of that matter, the coop case against Oldman4, was overly dramatic and obviously nasty from Oldman4's point of view.) It's best to get a better footing with evidence before taking action. Ideas on further ways to bring more clarity into all this? --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Offsite drama has not been grounds for banning people in the past. Kane has a right to complain about inaccuracies about his RW article, and gives us a chance to correct or remove the problematic portions. That was the rationale for the changes to his page. A history of problematic editing on specific topics could be grounds for a topic ban, and a history of unproductive arguments with a specific user(s) could be grounds for an interaction ban. Bongolian (talk) 18:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I do think we can make an exception if the "offsite drama" directly involves RationalWiki. Just as Dysklyver was finally banned after doxing RW editors offsite, I do think that harassing someone offsite based on their edits on RW is something that could be worthy of sanctions. Nevertheless, I'd like stronger evidence before moving forward with this case. Plutocow (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Offsite drama has not been grounds for banning people in the past. Kane has a right to complain about inaccuracies about his RW article, and gives us a chance to correct or remove the problematic portions. That was the rationale for the changes to his page. A history of problematic editing on specific topics could be grounds for a topic ban, and a history of unproductive arguments with a specific user(s) could be grounds for an interaction ban. Bongolian (talk) 18:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Now we have this whole issue of who writes that website smearing Oldman4 and equating him with Smith (and conflating his activity with that of Mikemikev too). Obviously not a nice experience for Oldman4. It makes sense to ask Kane some questions, and for him to share what it was he was recently wanting to share with moderators. But it's also worth noting the irony with some of this, and the allegations earlier against Oldman4, which were likewise based on a lot of coincidences and circumstances. There we got some evidence showing it was wrong to rush to a conclusion as lots of coincidences were pointed to. (The initial handling of that matter, the coop case against Oldman4, was overly dramatic and obviously nasty from Oldman4's point of view.) It's best to get a better footing with evidence before taking action. Ideas on further ways to bring more clarity into all this? --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Plutocow, there is strong behavioral evidence from specific diffs and false accusations Tetrapteryx has made about my account that ended up on the HDF "Ghost of Lomax" website. I could compile it all but Tetrapteryx has already admitted to supplying the website with all this content. As stated he is the only person in the world making these false accusations about my account with specific RW links. Literally nobody else in the world cares about my account, just him. It is unclear to me why this is not an immediate ban because he has written material for this website. The Ghost of Lomax website is not just a harassment website with misinformation about my account, it makes fake legal threats about closing this website down and contacting media authorities. The website's aim is to cause chaos, confusion and infighting at RationalWiki. Tetrapteryx is actively enabling and contributing to this anti-Rational Wiki website funded by the Human Diversity Foundation that is harming RW.
- It makes no sense why Kane is still posting here. If there was a professional health and safety team as there is at Wikipedia, Tetrapteryx would be immediately banned for off-site harassment. Just so we are clear this is the website he has written for https://www.ghostoflomax.com/ and supplied information to (it's currently offline) but he's repeatedly archived it. The website will likely be back up in a few days because his friends keep restoring it. He's said in his own words that he's never going to stop this. Oldman4 (talk) 23:56, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
What Oldman4 is saying here is almost entirely made up. I have only one account on this site, and that was verified during the Emily Willoughby AFD, when there was found to be no overlap in the IPs used by myself and by the other people voting there. Kirkegaard and I used to be friends, but haven't been in contact with one another in nearly five years at this point. I also have no connection to the Human Diversity Project, and wasn't even aware of its existence until it was publicized by the coverage from Hope Not Hate. Finally, I think Oldman4 is aware of who actually runs the "Ghost of Lomax" site, and that it isn't me. All of these statements he's making about me are false, and Oldman4 will never be be able to support any of them.
If others want, I can describe in more detail what my connection to the "HBD" movement is. In a nutshell: I have no involvement in the movement itself, but there are couple of individuals associated with the momement whom I regard as friends (Kirkegaard isn't one). The main such person whom I regard as a friend as Bryan Pesta, whom I've known since 2010, before he became involved in the movement. I haven't had anything to do with his research in that area, but I also don't believe in cutting of a friendship with someone just because of what he's chosen to study in recent years. Everyone knows that I'm also friends with Emily Willoughby and regularly collaborate with her, but I don't think most people consider her a HBDer, and she's no longer the subject of an article here.
I apologize for so much of my involvement here being focused on drama. I've been aware others might take issue with that, and I have several other edits planned (including an update to the Jerry Coyne article), but I don't have a lot of time to spend on editing here, and it keeps happening that there's some more urgent drama-related matter that's a higher priority to discuss.
- How fascinating. A committed hereditarian and friend of Pesta, a hard-core member of the Kirkegaard team; and a friend of Emily Willoughby who is firmly entrenched in ISIR and so undoubtedly still committed to hereditarianism, plans to update the article for hereditarian Jerry Coyne. What could possibly go wrong? Pinkerite (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- What I've been intending to add to the article about Coyne is a section about his resignation from the Freedom from Religion Foundation, because the article currently doesn't mention that, and I think it should. It has nothing to do with Coyne's views on race. You're much more active on here than I am, so you're welcome to add a section about that yourself if I don't get to it first. Tetrapteryx (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I've already written about it on my blog. There's quite a lot of cross-over between promoters of race pseudoscience and transphobes. Why, it's like you're all working for the same right-wing extremist plutocrats with the same fascist agenda. But it was extra-special when Coyne promoted the idea that transwomen are sex offenders. Since you're likely on friendly terms with Coyne (he refuses to speak to me and blocks me whenever he can) ask him why, since he's such a devoted atheist, he had no complaints about Peter Thiel's Bible-based screed about Armageddon vs. Antichrist. Pinkerite (talk) 17:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- What I've been intending to add to the article about Coyne is a section about his resignation from the Freedom from Religion Foundation, because the article currently doesn't mention that, and I think it should. It has nothing to do with Coyne's views on race. You're much more active on here than I am, so you're welcome to add a section about that yourself if I don't get to it first. Tetrapteryx (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
I also find it strange that Oldman4 would bring this issue up immediately after I raised the issue of impersonation accounts in Plutocow's user talk. This is the second time he's tried to retaliate against me for bringing up an apparently legitimate ban evasion issue, the first time being the case I described in Chillpilled's user talk here. I'm aware that back when Dysk was an administrator here, he was much too heavy-handed in his efforts to keep Smith off the site, but I don't think I'm making the mistakes that he did, and I don't deserve to be treated this way for trying to deal with that issue in a way that nobody else (as far as I'm aware) finds disruptive.
As I said in Plutocow's user talk, the issue I'd wanted to raise with the moderators about the impersonation accounts is one that I'd have preferred to discuss in private, but if others really want me to, I can explain it here instead. Should I do that? Tetrapteryx (talk) 18:32, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- "The main such person whom I regard as a friend as Bryan Pesta, whom I've known since 2010". Crazy. Pesta is a far-right extremist who was recently exposed by Hope Not Hate as a paid Human Diversity Foundation employee [8]. Pesta has weekly zoom calls with Kirkegaard and has attended far-right events. It's obvious you are involved with these HDF people. You can't be trusted.
- There are specific diffs and pieces of behavioral evidence indicating that you are writing the Ghost of Lomax material about my RW account. I am not claiming you are the owner or mastermind behind the website as HDF are clearly paying the bills but you have written material and specific diffs on RW that have been made on "Ghost of Lomax" website. How do you explain that? The same claims you have made end up on that website? Yet nobody else in the world apart from you cares about my account. If you are in video call or email communication with Pesta then you are also in contact with other HDF employees because they do group videos calls as exposed by Hope Not Hate. This isn't a 5 minute job to type up, but there are certain accusations you posted on RW about me that have ended up on "Ghost of Lomax". I would be happy to type up this evidence tomorrow. How many weekly calls are you having with Pesta? Oldman4 (talk) 18:44, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- As usual, you're assuming far, far too much based on what I've said. For the past several years, the entirety of my interaction with Pesta has been to occasionally chat with him on Facebook about what's new with one another, and to wish him luck in his lawsuit against Cleveland State University. My most recent conversation with him was in January of 2024.
- When the "Ghost of Lomax" person was writing the article for that site, he contacted me by email asking for diffs related to your edits here. I'm pretty sure he also asked similar questions to several other people. I've regarded your apparent connection to Oliver Smith as suspicious for a long time, so I gave that person what he was asking for. You may not like that, but it's clear from this exchange that you are connected to Smith somehow, and you've also usually been evasive when confronted about that connection. By not being forthcoming about your connection to Smith, I think you've made it inevitable that others would try to investigate exactly what that connection is. Tetrapteryx (talk) 19:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Kane's few mainspace edits have almost entirely been restricted to creationist topics, an area where he has some expertise, so I don't see how trust is a problem at this point. Bongolian (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Tetrapteryx, I am not Smith nor have I ever met the guy. He sent me some emails, that was it. This has been made clear many times. I have put out the offer to meet any HDF employee including the owner of the "Ghost of Lomax" website to meet me at any Starbucks in Brighton, London or Oxford. He doesn't reply. I also offered to go on cam to any HDF employee to talk about their harassment website and misleading false claims of mistaken identity. Nobody ever contacted me. It is clear you are guys are not interested in truth, you are just harassing me because I created the Human Diversity Foundation RationalWiki article and this is all "revenge" on me. Now that you have admitted to being in communication with "Ghost of Lomax" and writing all those misleading claims about me, you should be banned from here (see below). Oldman4 (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Kane's few mainspace edits have almost entirely been restricted to creationist topics, an area where he has some expertise, so I don't see how trust is a problem at this point. Bongolian (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Suspicous how this coop was started not too long after a coop against op was closed. I can smell an iban between these editors and a topic ban on hbd and hdf related articles. Phantasmagoria (talk) 22:07, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
Ban Kane[edit]
Jonathan Kane has finally admitted communication with the Ghost of Lomax directly above, "When the "Ghost of Lomax" person was writing the article for that site, he contacted me by email asking for diffs related to your edits here. I'm pretty sure he also asked similar questions to several other people" [9]. I knew this was true and he was supplying "Ghost of Lomax" with links, because the diffs were too specific. In other words Kane wrote this misinformation about my Wikipedia and RationalWiki account, supplied various diffs and is involved in harassing me off-site. He obviously knows who is running the website. As I argued from the beginning Kane has contributed writing to this "Ghost of Lomax" website. This guy is in HDF's pocket, I never claimed he was the owner but the attacks against me were supplied by him. It is sad how he has managed to dupe and swindle a few innocent users here. Nothing he is doing is good-faith. This user is involved in harassing me off-site. I have written 50 articles here, this guy hasn't contributed anything apart from a few edits on creationism. This user should be immediately banned not just for harassment but his HDF connections (Bryan Pesta). Absolutely disgusting behavior from this individual. Ban this internet harasser. Oldman4 (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
Sneaky Kirkegaard gang[edit]
I absolutely do not trust Jonathan Kane, and will be watching his attempt to edit the Jerry Coyne article closely. I think Kane is working on behalf of Race Science Inc. It's worth noting how sneaky the gang is - this is from the Hope not Hate Race Science Inc. article:
The team aims to slip papers into academic journals with higher impact and circulation than their own publications. If unable to do so, HDF will publish the group’s papers in their print journal Mankind Quarterly or the OpenPsych website, which has been described as “a pseudoscience factory-farm”. Kirkegaard is associated with the management of both titles. During a research team meeting in November 2023, Kirkegaard told his researchers that an article on “international dysgenics” was unlikely to get accepted by a proper academic imprint unless their colleague Bryan Pesta, a former scholar at Cleveland State University, could “make the words soft and sweet”. HDF leaders discussed a “pipeline” whereby the underground research team would publish scientific racism articles that would then be promoted by HDF’s public operations like Aporia or Edward Dutton’s YouTube channel, “The Jolly Heretic”.
Given how much the race pseudoscience network hates Rational Wiki and how much plutocrat money Kirkegaard appears to have access too, it seems very likely that Kane is part of a Kirkegaard-funded campaign against RW - and deleting the Emily Willougby article was an early success. Pinkerite (talk) 20:57, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- If there's some way to turn my financial records over to the RationalWiki moderators, I could show them that I've never received any money from Kirkegaard or his company, not even back when he and I were friends 5+ years ago. These claims about me are being made up completely out of thin air. This has been going on pretty much since I joined RationalWiki, always from the same one or two users. (The now-deleted talk page of the Emily Willoughby article has some older examples, about an imaginary collusion between myself and Edward Dutton.) Is this going to keep going on indefinitely? Tetrapteryx (talk) 21:23, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I did not make a claim - I said "it seems very likely..." And given how close you are with professional hereditarians, yes, I think it will go on indefinitely. And I think it's just a matter of time before more damning information is discovered about you - and Willoughby. Maybe Rational Wiki is not the place for you. But hey, maybe Willoughby will hook you up with some of that quarter million dollars she got from Institute of Mental Chronometry - an organization with a legacy of taking money from the Pioneer Fund - like so so many of the people you are known to have associated with. Pinkerite (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- If you want to know why I don't have many mainspace edits, the attitude you're showing here is part of why. Lack of time is the largest reason, but it isn't the only reason. I find RationalWiki's anti-creationism articles valuable in principle, but how am I supposed to feel motivated to contribute here when every aspect of my identity and my friendships is constantly scrutinized to search for anything incriminating? Tetrapteryx (talk) 22:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Poor hereditarian who just happens to befriend white supremacists and recipients of Nazi legacy money. Why can't we all just get along with racists? BTW what's your connection to Justapedia? Pinkerite (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm a member of Justapedia, although I haven't been active there recently, and I have the same username there that I do here. Tetrapteryx (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I knew you shilled for Justapedia on Quillette, I didn't realize you were a contributor to that Trump-loving garbage heap. Thanks for the admission. Pinkerite (talk) 23:39, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Tetrapteryx forgets to mention that he is a banned Wikipedia troll who had hardly any mainspace edits over there but was doing the same kind of thing, defending Kirkegaard and promoting conspiracy theories about another user sharing an account [10]. His edits were mostly on talk-pages obsessed with race crap. 0 productive contributions. Compare this users banned account to my over 54,000 edits and hundreds of article creations. We can all see who the troll is. Oldman4 (talk) 23:27, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Just a note about the money thing. Kirkegaard uses crypto [11]. He's not going to leave an easy trail to who he has been paying. Oldman4 (talk) 23:31, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Well money-laundering is the main point of crypto. Pinkerite (talk) 23:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm probably wasting my time replying to your falsehoods, but I'd like others to be aware that I more or less singlehandedly raised Wikipedia's William Beebe
article from start-class to GA-class. Check that article's edit history from January to June 2011, and the associated talk page discussion. I have more edits to that article, and to the related Bathysphere
article, than anything that relates to race. With your claim that I had "0 productive contributions" at Wikipedia, you're trying to get other people think I'm someone who's interested in race and nothing else, but I don't predict they're going to fall for it. Tetrapteryx (talk) 23:49, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Here is your block log [12]. I have never seen another one like that. Repeated blocks. Not only were you banned from Wikipedia, they revoked your talk-page access because you are an absolute pest. Let's click on your most recent 500 edits before you were blocked [13]. Not a single constructive edit. You were repeatedly taken to Arb Com because of your racist disruption. I am in contact with the WMF about your harassment. Keep it up, you are only making this worse for yourself. Oldman4 (talk) 00:23, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Why are you interested in race? Were you raised by racists? Pinkerite (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- His very "first" edits were on race and intelligence and to remove racism claims from James Watson's Wikipedia article [14]. I have over 340 article creations on Wiki, it's laughable if anyone compares my account to his. He is a troll, I am a historian. This guy's whole MO was to push race crap on Wiki and he got banned for it. Oldman4 (talk) 00:23, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Why are you interested in race? Were you raised by racists? Pinkerite (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Here is your block log [12]. I have never seen another one like that. Repeated blocks. Not only were you banned from Wikipedia, they revoked your talk-page access because you are an absolute pest. Let's click on your most recent 500 edits before you were blocked [13]. Not a single constructive edit. You were repeatedly taken to Arb Com because of your racist disruption. I am in contact with the WMF about your harassment. Keep it up, you are only making this worse for yourself. Oldman4 (talk) 00:23, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Just a note about the money thing. Kirkegaard uses crypto [11]. He's not going to leave an easy trail to who he has been paying. Oldman4 (talk) 23:31, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm a member of Justapedia, although I haven't been active there recently, and I have the same username there that I do here. Tetrapteryx (talk) 23:21, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Poor hereditarian who just happens to befriend white supremacists and recipients of Nazi legacy money. Why can't we all just get along with racists? BTW what's your connection to Justapedia? Pinkerite (talk) 23:10, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- If you want to know why I don't have many mainspace edits, the attitude you're showing here is part of why. Lack of time is the largest reason, but it isn't the only reason. I find RationalWiki's anti-creationism articles valuable in principle, but how am I supposed to feel motivated to contribute here when every aspect of my identity and my friendships is constantly scrutinized to search for anything incriminating? Tetrapteryx (talk) 22:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I did not make a claim - I said "it seems very likely..." And given how close you are with professional hereditarians, yes, I think it will go on indefinitely. And I think it's just a matter of time before more damning information is discovered about you - and Willoughby. Maybe Rational Wiki is not the place for you. But hey, maybe Willoughby will hook you up with some of that quarter million dollars she got from Institute of Mental Chronometry - an organization with a legacy of taking money from the Pioneer Fund - like so so many of the people you are known to have associated with. Pinkerite (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- He's apparently behind the Justapedia take on Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence. He manages to cite Kirkegaard, Richard Lynn, Charles Murray, Curtis S. Dunkel, Jonatan Pallesen and Heiner Rindermann. I wonder if there is a single professional racist he does not consider worthy of a citation. Pinkerite (talk) 00:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry, my bad, I misread this talk section on Race and Intelligence. It isn't Kane's article. But you can see whining about the leftist bias at Wikipedia. Or wait - maybe it was originally Kane's article on Wikipedia "recreated" by a user named Deva. Pinkerite (talk) 00:49, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) My very first edits on Wikipedia were to the now-deleted PRATT
article. I originally registered my Wikipedia account for the purpose of contributing to that article, along with the deleted older version of the Poe's Law article. You obviously know almost nothing about me, so I suggest that you stop making shit up. Tetrapteryx (talk) 00:41, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) My very first edits on Wikipedia were to the now-deleted PRATT
- So are Emily Willoughby and Emil Kirkegaard also contributors to Justapedia? Pinkerite (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- These questions have become completely off-topic. This has nothing to do with whether or not my behavior on RationalWiki has been a problem, so I'm done commenting here for now. Tetrapteryx (talk) 01:27, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- So are Emily Willoughby and Emil Kirkegaard also contributors to Justapedia? Pinkerite (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- So - not a "no." Is it Deva and BasicReality? I admit I am curious to see how far RW editors will go to tolerate someone so clearly devoted to race pseudoscience. But I wonder why you bother with RW at all since Justapedia is a much better fit for you. (Fun fact: Kirkegaard promoted Justapedia on Xitter.) Pinkerite (talk) 02:21, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Timeline of events[edit]
Because the original long piece of text I wrote is probably TLTR and not in bullet points, here is a factual run down of what has actually happened, that may help new editors or those unaware know what this is about.
- In 2023 and 2024 I made edits on Jonathan Kane's RationalWiki article [15] and Kane has hated me ever since. His RW article is well sourced, contains no defamation or libel.
- On 12 January 2025 the Human Diversity Foundation's "Ghost of Lomax" attack website was created (https://www.ghostoflomax.com/the-smith-v-substack-saga) which deliberately confused my account with Smith and has made fake legal threats against the RationalWiki Foundation and claims of contacting media authorities. The website admits that no newspaper or media source would print their article. Rightly so. These HDF people are a bunch of nutcases who lie for a living.
- The "Ghost of Lomax" website is a tribute to Abd Lomax who had communication with Emil Kirkegaard. Abd Lomax was a globally banned Wikipedia user who filed a failed lawsuit against the WMF. He was also a diagnosed schizophrenic and he was the first person to promote conspiracies about Smith. Say no more.
- On 13 January, the first person in the world to mention the website and promote it was the far-right X.com account TracingWoodgrains [16] (this same person has attacked David Gerard). "Ghost of Lomax" must have emailed TracingWoodgrains because the website has no mention anywhere prior to this. On 15th January Emil Kirkegaard tweeted about it [17]. Apart from Kirkegaard, TracingWoodgrains, Anatoly Karlin and HDF employees hardly anyone on X.com has promoted the website.
- On 15 January a coop case was created against me taking at face value all of the false claims on "Ghost of Lomax" and requesting to ban me.
- On 17 January, I had a video call with GeeJayK proving I am not Smith [18]. As I stated from the beginning I am not Smith. The only contact I have had with him is some email exchanges about how Kirkegaard and his fellow eugenicsts like to harass innocent people. As stated I can easily prove I am not Smith. If anyone else wants to talk in a video call or meet up in London/Oxford for a discussion that can be arranged.
- By the 19 January there was a strong consensus not to ban me [19]. 14 users voted against the ban. No users voted to ban.
- Since viewing the "Ghost of Lomax" website in January, I had a strong suspicion that Jonathan Kane was the main writer for it because specific diffs and accusations he has made about me ended up on this website. It was not possible that anyone else would be citing such specific claims and links.
- From what I have been sent, in late January a police report was filed against the owner of the "Ghost of Lomax" blog for harassment. The owner has publicly declared he is the "owner", not the "writer".
- On 6 February I opened this coop case against Jonathan Kane.
- Kane has since admitted he has been a friend of Bryan Pesta since 2010 [20] and is in private communication with this individual. Bryan Pesta is a paid Human Diversity Foundation employee and is personally paid by Kirkegaard to conduct "racialist" research. An expose about this can be found by Hope Not Hate [21]
- Kane admitted to supplying content and links to the "Ghost of Lomax" website, "When the "Ghost of Lomax" person was writing the article for that site, he contacted me by email asking for diffs related to your edits here. I'm pretty sure he also asked similar questions to several other people. I've regarded your apparent connection to Oliver Smith as suspicious for a long time, so I gave that person what he was asking for". Kane doesn't explain how the owner of "Ghost of Lomax" contacted him by email through RationalWiki. It is more likely Kane is in regular zoom calls with the HDF and he is supplying them with the information.
- My statement Kane is a writer for the "Ghost of Lomax" harrassment website has been proven correct. Kane's friend Bryan Pesta does weekly zoom calls with Kirkegaard.
- The Ghost of Lomax website isn't just defaming me by deliberately confusing my identity with Smith. It also tries to defame my Wikipedia account. I take Wikipedia seriously because I have over 54,000 edits, over 340 article creations and I created a WikiProject group. Unlike Kane and Kirkegaard who were both banned on Wikipedia for promoting racist nonsense. My activity as a historian is entirely net positive. Kane is an deceptive individual who is not only trying to destroy my RationalWiki account and reputation, he is trying to do the same at Wikipedia. I am not his first victim. He tried doing it to another user a few years ago. The WMF are well aware about what he has been up to.
- Kane cannot be trusted. He is an internet harasser in league with the Human Diversity Foundation. It is disgusting what he has been doing to me off-site. I have never attacked Kane off-site or ever written about him. There is no excuse for this off-site harassment and his attempts to dox me and ruin my life by getting his HDF friends after me. If there is a vote, he should be banned. If any of this had been done to a RationalWiki trustee there would be an immediate ban. It is unfair what I have had to put up with for the last month. Hopefully normal editing can resume with this idiot gone from here. Oldman4 (talk) 12:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Kane and fake legal threats[edit]
- Just a note about the fake legal threats which I managed to find on the archive: "Future media coverage should be specifically about Smith, not just RationalWiki in general, and it should be ongoing as long as RationalWiki is unwilling or unable to enforce his ban. This approach has a few potential benefits. First, if Smith’s responsibility for these articles can become widely enough known, this publicity may eventually blunt the impact of these articles’ high Google ranking, and reduce his future power over others’ careers. The widespread awareness of how RationalWiki is being exploited by one of its banned users may also eventually result in Google reducing the site’s ranking in search results. Finally, it may help future plaintiffs to present a stronger legal case against the RationalMedia Foundation, if there are further lawsuits similar to the recent case that led to RationalWiki deleting its article about the plaintiff." This is from the HDF "Ghost of Lomax" website that Kane has written for and is actively promoting off-site.
- At Wikipedia there is a strong policy about legal threats. Users are quickly banned for making them on or off-site. If you are reviewing policies about off-site harassment here, I think this should also be considered.
- Bryan Pesta filed a failed lawsuit against Cleveland State University after they fired him for unethical conduct. Kane in this very coop discussion has written "my interaction with Pesta has been to occasionally chat with him on Facebook about what's new with one another, and to wish him luck in his lawsuit against Cleveland State University". Kane is a dangerous person to keep around here considering his links to Pesta and other HDF employees and their legal problems. This isn't just a case of offline harassment; behind the scenes I think it is very likely he actively encourages "future plaintiffs". So we far we haven't had an apology from Kane about why he is writing for "Ghost of Lomax", a website whose only aim is to close RationalWiki down. Oldman4 (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Vote (invalidated)[edit]
Note: I am declaring this attempt at starting a ban vote to be invalid in accordance with the Community Standards. Coop votes may not be started within 24 hours of an initial complaint. DuceMoosoliniYour friendly RW
dictator moderator 20:32, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
Community standards / blocking policy proposal[edit]
Part of the above is a general discussion on community standards here vs. Wikipedia about off-site behavior impacting on-site affairs. I think that it's a good point that we should have something in the Community Standards about this. Specifically, if someone is active here in a way that clearly furthers doxxing, harassment, and/or legal threats presented on a separate website that targets this one or people on it. If that happens, and it would be ban-worthy if presented here, it should be ban-worthy if presented elsewhere too, I think. When we have a vote, I'd like a vote on such a proposal; exact wording can be worked out later if it passes. --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 08:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I don't believe CS mentions anything about this, but RW:Blocking policy has a couple of contradictory statements on this. It states that "RationalWiki also does not block for off-wiki actions" but also says solicitation of doxing material offsite is a blockable offense. Ultimately, the thing is that RationalWiki does not exist in a bubble and there are offsite actions like encouraging brigading, harassment, doxing, legal threats etc. that have a disruptive effect on how the site is run and our blocking policy should be flexible enough to handle situations like these. Plutocow (talk) 09:18, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- It may be flexible enough already for extreme/unusual circumstances, but it's vague and contradictory enough that there'll be recurring debate about what applies without changes. Clarifying, if voted on and people agree, could mostly be tweaking the blocking policy page, maybe briefly mentioning off-site behavior in the community standards page too. (I changed the heading to reflect that, it's not so much about either page as about the policy.) --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 09:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Being a 'neutral, vaguely interested bystander' - would 'Rationlwiki does not *normally* block... [but such activities may be taken into consideration]...' or some derivative of the UK police caution be a way forward?Anna Livia (talk) 10:28, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what exact language to use in the Community Standards, but I think the "no bans for off-site behavior" sentence should have a clear and explicit exception for off-site behavior that serves to threaten the Wiki (doxxing, encouraging brigading, harassment of editors, legal threats, etc).
DuceMoosoliniYour friendly RW
dictatormoderator 14:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what exact language to use in the Community Standards, but I think the "no bans for off-site behavior" sentence should have a clear and explicit exception for off-site behavior that serves to threaten the Wiki (doxxing, encouraging brigading, harassment of editors, legal threats, etc).
- Being a 'neutral, vaguely interested bystander' - would 'Rationlwiki does not *normally* block... [but such activities may be taken into consideration]...' or some derivative of the UK police caution be a way forward?Anna Livia (talk) 10:28, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- It may be flexible enough already for extreme/unusual circumstances, but it's vague and contradictory enough that there'll be recurring debate about what applies without changes. Clarifying, if voted on and people agree, could mostly be tweaking the blocking policy page, maybe briefly mentioning off-site behavior in the community standards page too. (I changed the heading to reflect that, it's not so much about either page as about the policy.) --ApooftGnegiol (talk) 09:44, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
RationalWiki does not block merely for associating with sites we disagree with. RationalWiki also does not block for off-wiki actions, such as a block on Wikipedia. So long as they don't vandalize the pages, you shouldn't stop them; rather, encourage them to have constructive discourse.
- I think it's clear that this desperately needs some version of the "exception" language that I proposed above. This is not adequate. We need that no shit clause.
DuceMoosoliniYour friendly RW
dictatormoderator 14:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)- To some extent, RW's somewhat vague CS etc is a strength because it cuts down on rule-lawyering. I think there should be a zeroth rule ['no shit clause'] that RW shall break any or all the policies to protect RW from enemies both foreign and domestic. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- The reason for banning on WP (and other wikis) could be a factor - 'being opinionated/having a strong a point of view' may be an issue on WP but not on certain other wikis (including RW); being disruptive, deliberately offensive, 'wrong sort of vandalism' (some vandalism is funny/apt) and other 'nastiness' is likely to be generally banworthy.
- With UK driving licences there is a points system towards banning: could there be a similar system for RW? Anna Livia (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- My experience/knowledge of WP standards is that you have to do quite a lot to get banned [or that one thing to be truly horrendous]. Quite a few of the bannees end up being the variants of say, KenBot here - people who simply do not fucking get the message and continue the same unhelpful/offensive/trollish behaviours. Most 'honest editors' with a strong POV would realise soon enough that WP is not the place for their essays on topics and go elsewhere, thus meaning a ban is unneeded. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I support the idea discussed in this thread but I will leave the drafting of the necessary CS amendment to someone else because I wouldn't know how exactly to word it and given the rules lawyers wikis attract that would be a serious problem.-Flandres (talk) 18:55, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Some persons with strong points of view/going into very obscure corners of [topic] will adapt according to their location, and there are those who know they are opinionated about a topic and act creatively (eg looking for sloppy thinking by others) or are 'drive by humourists' and similar. It is usually easier to identify 'this person is a troll/severely unwelcome/other nuisance' than to have a checkbox list (where the person only meets some of the criteria). Anna Livia (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- To some extent, RW's somewhat vague CS etc is a strength because it cuts down on rule-lawyering. I think there should be a zeroth rule ['no shit clause'] that RW shall break any or all the policies to protect RW from enemies both foreign and domestic. KarmaPolice (talk) 16:13, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think it's clear that this desperately needs some version of the "exception" language that I proposed above. This is not adequate. We need that no shit clause.
Decision time...[edit]
So the new discussion don't get lost.
Firstly, is there evidence that Jonathan Kane is Tetrapteryx? KarmaPolice (talk) 16:31, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- See his very first edit on RW, which was about Smith drama and the "NightHeron" Wikipedia account "This is the real Jonathan Kane, Emily Willoughby's coauthor". Kane has been in email communication with Bongolian since 2023. Here is Bongolian more recently confirming that Jonathan Kane is definitely Tetrapteryx "you can change your RationalWiki email address to your public persona email and send an email to one of the moderators via RationalWiki email. This latter method is how Jonathan Kane confirmed to me that he was not an imposter". Kane also admits here at Wikipediocracy "Yes, Tetrapteryx is me. I use that name on Discord also" [22] Oldman4 (talk) 17:10, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- See above, when Tetrapteryx says: "Everyone knows that I'm also friends with Emily Willoughby and regularly collaborate with her..." - who besides Jonathan Kane has regularly collaborated with Willoughby? Pinkerite (talk) 17:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Also, Kane established that he is Tetrapteryx shortly after creating his account here by emailing me from his public email address. This is still the email address that he uses on RW. Bongolian (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- KarmaPolice can you confirm if Jonathan Kane (Tetrapteryx) is an active member/approved member of the RationalWiki discord? I would be quite disturbed if he has had previous access there. If this is the case, who knows what sort of information he could have been leaking to the Human Diversity Foundation. A few years ago, Tetrapteryx was on a discord server known as the "Smithery" which was being run by Dysklyver. Both Abd Lomax and Mikemikev posted there and were never banned. I know it sounds obvious but if a user is banned from RW, then I think they should also be banned from the RW discord. Oldman4 (talk) 18:01, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I don't do Discord and I was under the impression that the RW Discord had zero formal links with RW [like the RW subReddit doesn't either]. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Support Chat Discord is linked to the Wiki. It requires an established Wiki account for access to most channels, and people with roles on the Wiki get roles in the Support Chat.
DuceMoosoliniYour friendly RW
dictatormoderator 18:26, 7 February 2025 (UTC)- RW Discord has been considered to be external to RW since its formation, at least in part because not all elected moderators have accounts there.
- Also, while Ghost of Lomax seems tangential to any possible disciplinary action, the website seems to neither have any current content nor have any archives of content. Bongolian (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I checked that myself earlier, can confirm. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Bongolian, the website has been taken temporarily offline because Smith doesn't want unfair use of his photograph and filed a complaint. This is something Emil Kirkegaard has been tweeting about [23]. In a few days the website will be back up again, all they are doing is removing photo by photo. Kane has said he has no intention of stopping. There are plenty of archives of Ghost of Lomax. Here is one https://archive.ph/LiPcX . If you check Wayback machine there are many archives. Oldman4 (talk) 18:58, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- I checked that myself earlier, can confirm. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- While RW Support Chat is unofficial, it does as a general rule mirror vote permabans (not sporadic permabans from sysops; part of the Support Chats purpose is to allow people who got caught up in an alt banning spree on accident to get another sysop to take care of it) on the basis that if you're enough of a shit to get permabanned from the site through a vote, you'll probably also not be a very productive member of the support chat. I don't see a reason to change that policy. -- Techpriest (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- The Support Chat Discord is linked to the Wiki. It requires an established Wiki account for access to most channels, and people with roles on the Wiki get roles in the Support Chat.
- I don't do Discord and I was under the impression that the RW Discord had zero formal links with RW [like the RW subReddit doesn't either]. KarmaPolice (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- KarmaPolice can you confirm if Jonathan Kane (Tetrapteryx) is an active member/approved member of the RationalWiki discord? I would be quite disturbed if he has had previous access there. If this is the case, who knows what sort of information he could have been leaking to the Human Diversity Foundation. A few years ago, Tetrapteryx was on a discord server known as the "Smithery" which was being run by Dysklyver. Both Abd Lomax and Mikemikev posted there and were never banned. I know it sounds obvious but if a user is banned from RW, then I think they should also be banned from the RW discord. Oldman4 (talk) 18:01, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Also, Kane established that he is Tetrapteryx shortly after creating his account here by emailing me from his public email address. This is still the email address that he uses on RW. Bongolian (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- See above, when Tetrapteryx says: "Everyone knows that I'm also friends with Emily Willoughby and regularly collaborate with her..." - who besides Jonathan Kane has regularly collaborated with Willoughby? Pinkerite (talk) 17:24, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Because of potential legal threats (and ongoing troll activity), I think it would be advisable for more than one of us to review the Human Diversity Foundation page for any unsubstantiated claims. Bongolian (talk) 19:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
[hide]This vote has been closed. Please do not add, remove or change votes. The result of this vote was: Tetrapteryx is topic banned from race and intelligence and is ibanned with Oldman4, but is not permabanned. |
---|
Ban Tetrapteryx[edit]Yay[edit]
Nay[edit]
Ineligible[edit]
Goat[edit]
Interaction Ban between Oldman4 and Tetrapteryx[edit]Yay[edit]
Nay[edit]Goat[edit][edit]Yay[edit]
Nay[edit]Goat[edit]
|
Blocking policy vote[edit]
[hide]This vote has been closed. Please do not add, remove or change votes. The result of this vote was: The change succeeds unanimously. |
---|
A vote to clarify the blocking policy to say when it's acceptable to block people for offsite behavior. I'm not sure if blocking policy changes require the same 2/3 supermajority as CS, but we should probably get a supermajority to be safe. The exact wording can be worked out is need be, but a good start would be replacing this paragraph
With something like this
Plutocow (talk) 20:21, 7 February 2025 (UTC) Yay[edit]
Nay[edit]Ineligible[edit]
Goat[edit] |