RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive83
Pinkerite
I personally think Pinkerite should have a Coop. They have misused this wiki for years as part of their feud/vendetta against who cannot be named and are continuing to do it. Their personal website is also incredibly pathetic. This person spends literally 24/7 attacking those same people. She would not be a loss to this wiki if banned. Cryogenica (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Hardly true that they have "misused this wiki for years" when they only created an account in March 2024. Also having a "pathetic" personal website is not grounds for taking action against them. Spud (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Cryogenica, you've only been here since April 29; you aren't a sysop; you don't even have a home page. You have chutzpah to be complaining about Pinkerite. Bongolian (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe Cryogenica is a sock from someone? Or ban evasion? Pretty weird that a new registered account would make such a suggestion...Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- I can actually see what damage she is doing and potentially causing this place another lawsuit. Firstly, Pinkerite was previously here in 2023. Look at the Steven Pinker edit history. Her website is creepily named Pinkerite and follows his every move, logging his every comment, etc. I think there is evidence she was editing the Pinker article on IPs (pre-2023) but I'm not going to bother presenting it. Her major obsessions are with Pinker and [redacted] who [redacted] states on social media she has been [redacted] and considering the latter has a loose association with the HDF, she then targeted anyone HDF related. My argument this person has misused this wiki is they created the article on Kahn and wrote the majority of the Pinker article they have been in a long-term feud with. I don't think this wiki should allow attack-pieces to be created in this way by people who hold a big grudge against someone. This was the same criticism this wiki had of Smith although unlike Pinkerite he seems to have other interests (cyptids, ufos) and lost interest, while Pinkerite still dedicates all her time here to attacking [redacted] and his buddies. My view is to just ban this women who is evidently very disturbed. Cryogenica (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Still no grounds for a ban. Spud (talk) 11:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- With Smith banned and >90% of his articles on people removed I don't see it as making sense to keep Pinkerite around. One of her articles was deleted, will there be more removed? Cryogenica (talk) 11:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- We don't ban people because 'it doesn't make sense to keep them around". Point to a specific instance of banworthy behaviour or stop wasting everyone's time; you're giving a vague outline of a case against Pinkerite and hoping others will fill in the details for you. Christopher (talk) 12:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- The banworthy behaviour is misusing this wiki as part of their long-term feud with Kahn/Pinker etc. Pinkerite's articles are more in line with Encyclopedia Dramatica content e.g. since she follows [redacted] everyday and watches his social media like a hawk ([redacted] calls her a "stalker") she [redacted|logged his tweets] calling someone a "retard". Why on earth is that relevant for this wiki? There are then 18 (!) [redacted|screenshots]] she took of [redacted] calling someone a "retard". This is the person you are defending. As I said, I don't think this wiki should be misused as part of people's online feuds/vendettas against others. Pinkerite then targets anyone [redacted] has met in real life or associated with. Why for example was it relevant to mention on his article he met with Bo Winegard in January 2023? This woman watches [redacted]'s every move and creepily logs it on her blog and the [redacted] article she created. That article alone is giving this wiki a bad reputation. Simply run Google searches and people are asking why this site tolerates someone obsessively following and hounding [redacted] (who has blocked Pinkerite on multiple social media accounts) and is logging his random tweets here. Cryogenica (talk) 13:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- The article for Razib [redacted] looks clinical and thorough to me. While 18 screenshots is a bit much, it certainly shows that [redacted] throws around the word "retard" like a thirteen-year-old boy (and has a lot of time to post on the bad place). And I think that documenting networks is one of the most useful aspects of RationalWiki, because Wikipedia does not let you do that until an Official Journalist reports on it (eg. if Mr. X spoke at a crank event covered in the news, you can't mention that unless the news said that Mr. X was there (no original research), even if the list of speakers is public).Polydamas (talk) 16:05, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- The banworthy behaviour is misusing this wiki as part of their long-term feud with Kahn/Pinker etc. Pinkerite's articles are more in line with Encyclopedia Dramatica content e.g. since she follows [redacted] everyday and watches his social media like a hawk ([redacted] calls her a "stalker") she [redacted|logged his tweets] calling someone a "retard". Why on earth is that relevant for this wiki? There are then 18 (!) [redacted|screenshots]] she took of [redacted] calling someone a "retard". This is the person you are defending. As I said, I don't think this wiki should be misused as part of people's online feuds/vendettas against others. Pinkerite then targets anyone [redacted] has met in real life or associated with. Why for example was it relevant to mention on his article he met with Bo Winegard in January 2023? This woman watches [redacted]'s every move and creepily logs it on her blog and the [redacted] article she created. That article alone is giving this wiki a bad reputation. Simply run Google searches and people are asking why this site tolerates someone obsessively following and hounding [redacted] (who has blocked Pinkerite on multiple social media accounts) and is logging his random tweets here. Cryogenica (talk) 13:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- We don't ban people because 'it doesn't make sense to keep them around". Point to a specific instance of banworthy behaviour or stop wasting everyone's time; you're giving a vague outline of a case against Pinkerite and hoping others will fill in the details for you. Christopher (talk) 12:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- With Smith banned and >90% of his articles on people removed I don't see it as making sense to keep Pinkerite around. One of her articles was deleted, will there be more removed? Cryogenica (talk) 11:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Still no grounds for a ban. Spud (talk) 11:03, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- I can actually see what damage she is doing and potentially causing this place another lawsuit. Firstly, Pinkerite was previously here in 2023. Look at the Steven Pinker edit history. Her website is creepily named Pinkerite and follows his every move, logging his every comment, etc. I think there is evidence she was editing the Pinker article on IPs (pre-2023) but I'm not going to bother presenting it. Her major obsessions are with Pinker and [redacted] who [redacted] states on social media she has been [redacted] and considering the latter has a loose association with the HDF, she then targeted anyone HDF related. My argument this person has misused this wiki is they created the article on Kahn and wrote the majority of the Pinker article they have been in a long-term feud with. I don't think this wiki should allow attack-pieces to be created in this way by people who hold a big grudge against someone. This was the same criticism this wiki had of Smith although unlike Pinkerite he seems to have other interests (cyptids, ufos) and lost interest, while Pinkerite still dedicates all her time here to attacking [redacted] and his buddies. My view is to just ban this women who is evidently very disturbed. Cryogenica (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe Cryogenica is a sock from someone? Or ban evasion? Pretty weird that a new registered account would make such a suggestion...Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Cryogenica, you've only been here since April 29; you aren't a sysop; you don't even have a home page. You have chutzpah to be complaining about Pinkerite. Bongolian (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Defending myself against racists, Neo-Nazis and their allies
Keep going Cryogenica - I can't wait to write about this on Pinkerite, which will of course include references to things/people currently being censored here. I don't need Rational Wiki - I was writing about Steven Pinker, the Intellectual Dark Web and Race Science long before I created an account on Rational Wiki - which was July 2023 in case anybody here cares about accuracy. And I will keep writing about people who promote race pseudoscience - like your friend [redacted] - whatever happens to RW. Pinkerite (talk) 14:48, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Although I hesitated for years to use Rational Wiki as a source for Pinkerite, because the site looks a bit seedy and some articles are poor and heavy on opinion and light on sources, it was when City Journal attacked Rational Wiki that I realized how much the race pseudoscience world hated it, and so made me value it. And a big part of that value is its high SEO. The reason I created the article Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence (NHAI) is because other search results on that term do not give a full recounting of the history of NHAI, nor a full account of criticisms of its claims. The RW NHAI article was awarded a silver brain, so I'm not the only editor here who values it. Other articles I started have been awarded, and I'm especially proud of the article I started on E. O. Wilson. I am equally proud of my article which was yanked and which also received an award. I will be reposting most of its contents on my Pinkerite site, although certainly few people who have heard of the article's subject are unaware of his racism. But I did some good reporting in that article, and I don't want it to be lost because of the insanity going on here. I archived other articles I started or made significant contributions to and will be sharing those on Pinkerite as they are censored here. I was always aware the Rational Wiki could become unstable and taken over by those who are not strongly anti-racist, and so have never completely counted on it. But I'll thank rando pro-racist creeps to stop lying about me here. Pinkerite (talk) 15:27, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- It is a defamatory lie to claim I "stalk" [redacted]. It is illegal to stalk anyone in the United States and so falsely accusing someone of stalking is defamation. I do not stalk [redacted] - I write about his public statements and actions as well as [redacted-racism/ articles about him]. This is not only my legal right, it is my ethical duty since he and his racist pseudoscience are sometimes mainstreamed by famous people like Steven Pinker who agrees with [redacted]'s pseudoscience beliefs, and others who don't agree but who should know better. [redacted] is clearly part of an international race pseudoscience network and every aspect of that network must be documented. Only a racist would complain about my documenting the race pseudoscience network.Pinkerite (talk) 15:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Finally, to address the various lies made by Cryogenica, who has decided it's a good idea to lie about and defame another Rational Wiki editor:
- "Her website is creepily named Pinkerite and follows his every move, logging his every comment, etc." RESPONSE: This is an obvious lie - just look at Pinkerite - I sometimes go weeks without mentioning Pinker, and I'm not interested in most of his moves and comments - just those made to promote race pseudoscience or defend or promote racists. Although his actions in support of Jeffrey Epstein are also reprehensible.
- "Her major obsessions are with Pinker and [redacted] who [redacted] states on social media she has been stalking him since ~2006 and considering the latter has a loose association with the HDF, she then targeted anyone HDF related." RESPONSE: My website is clearly labeled "Steven Pinker, the Intellectual Dark Web and Race Pseudoscience" and that is what I write about. And I'm not "obsessed" with either of them, but it is fascinating how much Cryogenica echoes [redacted] and his racist friends in their attack against me.
- "My argument this person has misused this wiki is they created the article on Kahn and wrote the majority of the Pinker article" RESPONSE: I did create the [redacted] article, I did not write the majority of the Pinker article although I did make big contributions - after I was asked to do so by another Rational Wiki editor.
- "I don't think this wiki should allow attack-pieces to be created in this way by people who hold a big grudge against someone. This was the same criticism this wiki had of Smith although unlike Pinkerite he seems to have other interests (cyptids, ufos) and lost interest, while Pinkerite still dedicates all her time here to attacking [redacted] and his buddies. My view is to just ban this women who is evidently very disturbed." RESPONSE: I have other interests which are well documented online should anybody care to look. I think the lies and personal attacks by Cryogenica against me - and in order to aid and abet race pseudoscience promoters - should get Cryogenica banned, but at this point I have little expectation that the people running this show will do the right thing. Pinkerite (talk) 16:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- You lack self-awareness and are impossible to engage with. Best to just archive this. Cryogenica (talk) 16:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Archive?
There is no case against Pinkerite at this present time. I think this should be archived. Spud (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
My userpage
Please either change the protection settings to autopatrolled or give me my mop back so I can edit it. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 02:35, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- @GrammarCommie Changed protection to autoconfirmed. ミ★ LunaAHHHHH 02:49, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- @LunaAHHHHH Thanks. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- If you feel that you want your mop back, you can request it here, addressing any significant issues that were brought up in the 2022 coop case. Bongolian (talk) 03:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Bongolian Given that I'm still an ornery fuck, I doubt that I would be able to satisfy the criticisms that were leveled against me in the past. I mainly just wanted to be able to edit my userpage, since apparently people are visiting it. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 17:55, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- If you feel that you want your mop back, you can request it here, addressing any significant issues that were brought up in the 2022 coop case. Bongolian (talk) 03:02, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
- @LunaAHHHHH Thanks. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 03:00, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
Probable AI vandalism
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2001:4479:6206:200:6C4F:A097:3D64:E8E3
Was this BoN replacing text in random articles with AI-generated text? I reverted but didn't block. Their additions set off two separate AI text detectors while previous text didn't. Might be something to look out for, I don't know what AI detectors are the best ones but I used ZeroGPT and GPTZero. There are complaints online and in some news reports about these tools but this article says those two were highly accurate. Chillpilled (talk) 09:31, 18 June 2025 (UTC) I partly restored BoN's edits as a separate detector (Quillbot) didn't say it's AI, and looking manually some of it appeared constructive. Either way, something to think about. Chillpilled (talk) 09:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Chillpilled Thanks for checking. Spud (talk) 10:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- That text was obviously AI-written, whatever Quillbot says. Christopher (talk) 15:07, 18 June 2025 (UTC)