May 24, 2005

10:51 PM

The Wacky Antics of user BushIsForEating (continuation of closed mt below)
posted by Heywood Mogroot to etiquette/policy at 10:51 PM (244 comments total)

Umm, didn't Matthowie say that we'd had enough of this?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 10:54 PM on May 24, 2005

Drop me an email if you want to talk, but I'm assuming there's a reason why the thread was closed.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 10:55 PM on May 24, 2005

I like pancakes. Who here likes pancakes?
posted by dg at 10:58 PM on May 24, 2005

why would I waste $5 to get called a troll more often then I am already?

well, the pattern of BIFE's short posting career here is basically covering your back:

His first post:

Since we know that the current American government is guilty of torture [...] what can we do about it?

Let's have another MeFi circlejerk!

Sounds like something you'd want to say if you weren't such a decent persona.

Next we have:

Every asshat who has ever voted Repuglican should be rounded up and moved to one of these nations. It's where they belong, with other fucking uncivilized barbarians.

Such a slam on you! Clever room-mate.

Two minutes later we have:

Fuck you tddl, administration whore! Take your red-state nonsense back to LGF, your not welcome here.

Pretending to be a leftie and slamming you so you look persecuted here. More cleverness.

Then, he responds to me calling him out on his obvious false-flag effort:

Hey, Im still here and Im going to be for a long time. Are you defending tddl now or something?

Again, very clever attack on you by mentioning you this way.

With a sample size of 2 it's hard to tell much of anything.

Well, doing more research I was able to bracket your roommates first post here:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

So BIFE registered an account in the 13 minutes you left your computer unattended?

And you wrote your rather longish 1:13 PM post right after BIFE vacated your machine?
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 10:59 PM on May 24, 2005

I like pancakes. Who here likes pancakes?

I do!



What do you think are cooler, unicorns or rainbows?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:00 PM on May 24, 2005

So BIFE registered an account in the 13 minutes you left your computer unattended?

I have no idea where I was at that time, but I'd suspect work since it was in the middle of the day. Thereofre it's likely that we were on different comptuers at the time. I introduced him to MeFi, we horse around and debate politics offline, so why not take it online?

I don't know what your issue here is. Like I said, drop me an email at dt -at- domainsource -dot- net if you want to chat. Otherwise I think I'll let my posting record stand for itself. I think there is a civility problem on MeFi, but it cuts across the political spectrum.

Otherwise it has been solved to the satisfaction of #1 and I don't know what more I can do other than meet you at the next MeetUp.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:05 PM on May 24, 2005

I've personally gone and kicked his tail for using my computer when I walked out...

...it's likely that we were on different comptuers at the time.
posted by trondant at 11:28 PM on May 24, 2005

I've personally gone and kicked his tail for using my computer when I walked out...

...it's likely that we were on different comptuers at the time.

Two different occasions. One was in the middle of the day, one was tonight.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:30 PM on May 24, 2005

That would explain the discrepancy.
posted by trondant at 11:38 PM on May 24, 2005

One was in the middle of the day

This past Sunday, actually.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:38 PM on May 24, 2005

This past Sunday, actually.

Ahh, that would put me at my girlfriend's house in Berkeley then. So, yeah, I was about 60 miles away from home at the time.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:40 PM on May 24, 2005

Okay, maybe less than 60 miles, more like 30-some. Was up there since it was graduation weekend for UC Berkeley grad students and we have some mutual friends who got to walk.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:41 PM on May 24, 2005

that would put me at my girlfriend's house in Berkeley then

thedevildancedlightly at 12:16 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:51 PM on May 24, 2005

posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:51 PM PST on May 24 [!]

Like I said, this has been solved to #1's satisfaction. I'm not sure why you're continuing your witchhunt here, but I'd be happy to meet you at the next Bay Area meetup and solve this in person. You don't have a ZIP in your profile, but you're clearly on PST so there's at least a chance. Heck, I'll even buy you a beer. I have better things to do than sit here and explain that different people can live in one house even if they're not married (I know, Bush & Co are working on it to make sure guys can't live together since they might catch teh gay).

thedevildancedlightly at 12:16 PM PST on May 22

You're saying that I wasn't paying enough attention to my girlfriend? Yeah, sorry. Other than that, not sure what to say. I post a lot. 721 comments on MeFi as of the moment. Pretty much ANY event could happen in between posts. People complain all the time about how much I post.

Wait a second, all of YOUR posts correspond pretty closely to mine. I mean, we've been "discussing" this a lot.

Okay, I'll admit it, "Heywood Mogroot" is actually a sock puppet account. HA! All of this, the MeTa and everything was actually my attempt to show how clever I am.

Got that everyone? "Heywood Mogroot" is a sock puppet account. Fooled you ALL! Now mathowie can you please delete my "Heywood Mogroot" account for me? Thanks!
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 11:58 PM on May 24, 2005

Okay, I'll prove it, watch this: I'll log on as Heywood Mogroot soon and "deny" that Heywood Mogroot is actually a sock puppet account.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:10 AM on May 25, 2005

this has been solved to #1's satisfaction.

well, I don't think I had quite detailed the various suspicious coincidencies between you and the BIFE's posts, like the 1 minute timestamp difference between the two accounts' posts tonight nor the close correlation of your timestamps bracketing BIFE's first post to mf Sunday afternoon.

I have better things to do than sit here and explain that different people can live in one house

Alas, that is not the issue. You claimed your roommate, one minute after you posted your 8:29 post, switched user accounts on your machine and posted his 8:30, then left his account active on your machine when you posted your 8:43.

What puzzles me somewhat, is how your roommate could post on another machine Sunday afternoon, but have to do this somewhat suspicious hot-seating with you tonight. I suppose the computer he used on Sunday afternoon was not available to him tonight.

Pretty much ANY event could happen in between

Indeed. I am simply AMAZED at that tight bracketing on Sunday afternoon. Your room-mate appears to be REALLY messing with you, huh?

YOUR posts correspond pretty closely to mine

Ah, but I haven't posted in your voice yet. Which is what you've admitted the 8:43 PM PST May 24 BIFE post is.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:26 AM on May 25, 2005

HM....apart from insinuating until the cows come home, do you actually have any solid contradictory evidence from the threads and comments or any other source that will take your accusations to some concrete conclusion?? Personally I think TDDL wears army boots and nowt else while singing xmas carols on cliff tops during full moons but I don't actually have the evidence to support my suspicions yet. So: anything else there maestro?
posted by peacay at 12:33 AM on May 25, 2005

Indeed. I am simply AMAZED at that tight bracketing on Sunday afternoon. Your room-mate appears to be REALLY messing with you, huh?

I think the whole point is that he wasn't "messing with me" because I was miles away and he was enjoying the subtle political discussions on MeFi in his own way.

Reading back at the Sunday posts it looks like he was off having a conversation that had nothing to do with me. I was talking about the Gonzales memo, he was talking about circlejerks.

I fail to see where the "messing with" is. His point wasn't exactly subtle, but it was about the thread, not me.

I suppose the computer he used on Sunday afternoon was not available to him tonight.

Or, quite to the contrary, I used my girlfriend's computer in Berkeley and left my computer at home. Why would I want to lug my computer with me to her house if I can use hers?

Further, why the heck would BIFE have linked me as a house-mate if I were trying to keep it some sort of secret?

but I haven't posted in your voice yet

See, there, I just "denied" it, like I promised I would. Mathowie, can you delete my "Heywood Mogroot" sock puppet account?



Like I said, there is an easy way to solve this. Come to the next Bay Area meetup. I'm happy to meet you there and even buy you a beer for your troubles. I'll drag Jeff along, and maybe even bring my girlfriend if you need a witness as to where I was on Sunday. I think that's a perfectly reasonable solution and I don't understand why you aren't willing to take it up.

If you're not willing to do that then I think this ridiculous inquiry needs to stop. You've presented all the evidence and it doesn't show anything other than your strange compulsion to attack me. Why do you feel the need to be the private investigator for MeFi other than some sort of personal grudge? I don't think there's a persecution problem in general on MeFi, but I'm trying to understand why you feel the need to spend the better part of your evening wasting time on this.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:35 AM on May 25, 2005

To sum up:

I've offered you my email addres if you wanted to contact me personally. So far you've refused to just email and work this out directly, instead you prefer to throw whatever "evidence" you have against the wall to see what sticks.

I've offered photographic evidence of who the players are. So far you've ignored it.

I've offered to meet you in person. You've ignored my offer to give definitive proof. Not so much as even an excuse as to why you can't.

I've offered to meet you in person and buy you a beer for your troubles. You've ignored my offer to give definitive proof.

I've done everything in my power to resolve this situation but you keep digging through the posting history as if there's something there.

I'm perfectly happy to solve this a very reasonable way. Why aren't you?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:44 AM on May 25, 2005

anything else there maestro?

well, actually, just one silly thing:

BIFE's 7:24 PM PST on May 24:
Every asshat who has ever voted Repuglican

echoed my "asshat" comments of 6:51 and 7:01PM

(but note I restricted the "asshat" appelation to admin apologists, not anyone who has ever voted 'Republican' (that would include me, alas)

But like I said, I don't care at all about the actual particulars of this, tddl is tddl regardless of how many of his roommates are 'helping' him out here, I just wanted to draw the details out from him such that if anyone did actually care about this instance's effect on the integrity of mf they could check the story, eg. compare the logged IPs of those bracketed posts on Sunday.

Then again, maybe tddl's roommate went over with him to Berkeley. He's certainly one crafty fellow.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:46 AM on May 25, 2005

posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:46 AM PST on May 25 [!]

Yet another post ignoring a perfectly reasonable request to solve this at the next MeFi meetup by all meeting each other, sharing laughs, and moving past this. There is a very easy solution here that you are just ignoring.

I'll even buy you a beer. What do you say?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:48 AM on May 25, 2005

ah, scratch that about tddl's roommate being in the same locale as tddl on Sunday.

I'm perfectly happy to solve this a very reasonable way. Why aren't you?

There's nothing to resolve, really. As I said in the beginning, even though the most parsimonious explanation of BIFE speaking in your voice with the 8:43 post is that you had forgotten to switch the account back after the 8:30 BIFE post, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe your story of such quick hot-seating after your 8:29 post.

I just laid everything out here as clear as I could so others could reach their own judgements on the matter.

If nobody else cares then that's the end of this l'affaire BIFE as far as I'm concerned.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:53 AM on May 25, 2005

I just laid everything out here as clear as I could so others could reach their own judgements on the matter.

Sounds great. You have some extended coincidences (ie, you're not the only one to use the word "asshat") and some interesting posting history.

On the other hand, I'm offering to lay everything out in meatspace for the sake of actual PHYSICAL evidence of who is who around here.

The offer to buy you a beer stands if you show up. I don't hold this against you, even if I can't understand why you've wasted north of 3 hours of your life on it.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:57 AM on May 25, 2005

Damnit, but I just ran ten miles home and got my pitchfork and torches and ran all the way back!

Oh, hey, but there's beer! Woot.

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale in a keg, you say? And a pancake dinner to boot? I love you too! A whole lot! But please take your hands out of my pockets. I'm not even drunk yet.
posted by loquacious at 1:09 AM on May 25, 2005

The offer to buy you a beer stands if you show up

I just might take you up on that :)

evidence of who is who around here

Well, I checked the ZIPs and I guess you're not Matt!

even if I can't understand why you've wasted north of 3 hours of your life on it

It was an interesting exercise in forensics, both written and technical. Good night.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 1:11 AM on May 25, 2005

But please take your hands out of my pockets. I'm not even drunk yet.

Oh come on, we'll just faithfuck. That way we won't violate our sacred covenant with God.

I just might take you up on that :)

I'll keep my eyes open.

Seriously, for the record, I've offered from the beginning to resolve this in the real world and even offered to buy him a beer. That should say pretty clearly how ridiculous this whole thing is.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 AM on May 25, 2005

The only thing that comes between me and God is my Calvin Kliens, bucko.

Or: Ask again, six beers later.
posted by loquacious at 1:16 AM on May 25, 2005

But.....the combat boots.......the carols?
posted by peacay at 1:16 AM on May 25, 2005

Hey, I'm still on beer No. 2.

You want me to just jump in those jungle paratrooper lug-soles and bust out with Little Town of Bethlehem or the Little Drummer Boy without proper muscle relaxation? I could break my neck, you fiend.
posted by loquacious at 1:37 AM on May 25, 2005

Welcome the never-ending Kangaroo Court that is the grey.
posted by grouse at 1:41 AM on May 25, 2005

Sorry, I misread the old post. I thought it was requesting me or Jessamyn to close the thread.

This new user sounds like a mess, but the first comment says that they'll try and cool it, so I said that maybe the problem is solved and I'll watch the account.

Is there anything more to this? It sounds like we're all spinning our wheels over nothing here.
posted by mathowie at 2:14 AM on May 25, 2005

It sounds like we're all spinning our wheels over nothing here.

I would agree, and I think HM also said that he was done.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 2:16 AM on May 25, 2005

I swear to god I'll post knifebutt in this thread.
posted by moift at 2:21 AM on May 25, 2005

-.
posted by gsb at 3:38 AM on May 25, 2005

moift, you were the chosen one! you were supposed to destroy knifebutt, not post it!
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 3:45 AM on May 25, 2005

[this was stupid]
posted by mischief at 5:44 AM on May 25, 2005

Heywood Mogroot: Parsimonious does not mean what you think it means.
posted by Mid at 6:56 AM on May 25, 2005

I know this is over and all, but HM, did you ever ask yourself why tddl would have immediately claimed that BIFE was his roomate if this was just a fake account set up by tddl? Nobody had accused tddl of being connected to BIFE, and they never would have if tddl had not brought it up himself. If this was some big elaborate deception, why would tddl have involved himself?
posted by pardonyou? at 7:13 AM on May 25, 2005

Obviously, that was all just part of the elaborate deception, pardon.

Jeez.

* rolls eyes *
posted by yhbc at 7:29 AM on May 25, 2005

Didja ever notice how Clark Kent and Superman are never seen together?
posted by splatta at 8:00 AM on May 25, 2005

I have gone over all the comments with a fine tooth comb and fed them into a text analysis program and have arrived at this inescapable conclusion: BIFE is actually Carlos Quevedo.

You heard it here first.

Seriously, mogroot, this thread was pretty ridiculous.
posted by soyjoy at 8:02 AM on May 25, 2005

Didja ever notice how Clark Kent and Superman are never seen together?

And Michael Jackson and Diana Ross.
posted by amberglow at 8:42 AM on May 25, 2005

Heywood Mogroot: Parsimonious does not mean what you think it means.
posted by Mid at 6:56 AM PST on May 25 [!]

When dealing with hypothesis testing parsimonious means something else:

Put a simpler way, parsimony is "a principle that states that the simplest explanation that explains the greatest number of observations is preferred to more complex explanations".
posted by trey at 9:13 AM on May 25, 2005

OK, fine. Like Occam's Razor. Still sounds bizarre to my ear in this context.
posted by Mid at 9:18 AM on May 25, 2005

pardonyou? writes "I know this is over and all, but HM, did you ever ask yourself why tddl would have immediately claimed that BIFE was his roommate if this was just a fake account set up by tddl? "

If Bush were tddl's roommate, they'd likely be at the same internet address, an internet address that would show up for both tddl and Bush in mathowie's server logs. Two accounts with the same IP address would immediately look like sock-puppetry, unless another explanation were given.

If tddl is being honest, he had to mention the roommate before anyone looked at the logs, as mentioning it after being asked about the logs would have looked like a flimsy excuse.

If Mogroot is right and bush is a tddl sock-puppet, tddl still had to get a plausible explanation for the shared IP address out before anyone thought to ask about it.

Either way, tddl had to explain having the same IP address as Bush, and he had to offer that explanation before anyone asked.


BUt I'm curious: tddl now says he was at another computer, sixty miles away in Berkeley. If so, how'd he even know Bush was his roommate, and how'd tddl accidently post under Bush's account?
posted by orthogonality at 9:38 AM on May 25, 2005

And Michael Jackson and Diana Ross.

There's a really simple explanation for this, but I swore a celebrity-bound oath under pain of death not to tell anyone why. Sorry.
posted by AlexReynolds at 9:39 AM on May 25, 2005

>BUt I'm curious: tddl now says he was at another computer, sixty miles away in Berkeley. If so, how'd he even know Bush was his roommate, and how'd tddl accidently post under Bush's account?

It's a VPN'd (twice repeated) WiMAX connection, a full year before it goes public. And they switched laptops by mistake before he left for Berkeley.

The facts are plain, don't bring your Liberal anti-tddl bias to the table.
posted by gsb at 9:51 AM on May 25, 2005

Either way, tddl had to explain having the same IP address as Bush, and he had to offer that explanation before anyone asked.

Why? If we assume the "sock puppet" theory, I don't buy that tddl would have felt compelled to reveal the connection on the fear that Matt would begin trying to randomly see whether BIFE's IP address happened to match one of 20,000+ other members. Remember, the original MeTa was: "This BIFE guy's posts are offensive." Who would assume that Matt would start comparing IP addresses, instead of just banning BIFE? I'm sorry, I just don't buy it.
posted by pardonyou? at 10:04 AM on May 25, 2005

Okay! Well, I guess we'll see you guys at Pauline's tonight, then?
posted by obloquy at 10:40 AM on May 25, 2005

pardonyou:

I don't buy that tddl would have felt compelled to reveal the connection

There would not have been a sockpuppet issue had not a tddl post been written with a BIFE handle at 8:43PM last night.

tddl's explanation was that this roommate was screwing with him by posting to mf on his laptop (without tddl knowing).

I found this somewhat suspicious after checking the timestamps and seeing that BIFE's posted just 1 minute after tddl posted immediately prior (8:29PM and 8:30PM), requiring some pretty quick hotseating without tddl knowing that BIFE was using his computer.

There is further evidence of BIFE being a tddl sockpuppet from the tight bracketing of BIFE's first post on Sunday and the three posts from tddl at that approximate same time:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:16 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

IP logs would indeed solve this tempest in a teapot, since tddl claimed BIFE was miles away from him on Sunday afternoon.

But if matt doesn't care about this I sure don't either.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 10:53 AM on May 25, 2005

You don't care?
*skeptical*
That's an awful lot of time & energy investment for 'not caring'.

I'm not sure what the point is anyways. We know full well there are a number of sock puppet accounts on MeFi (theatrical matriarch, mathowie's baby, to name the most obvious ones), so why would you care about this one (if it even is one)? You might not LIKE sock puppet accounts, but clearly they're tolerated.
posted by raedyn at 11:02 AM on May 25, 2005

correction to above:

tddl's explanation was that this roommate was screwing with him by posting to mf on his laptop (without tddl knowing).

...this leaving BIFE as the logged-in user on tddl's machine after 8:30PM.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:03 AM on May 25, 2005

So why would you care about this one?

If tddl were posting as a faux-liberal (and a quite obnoxious one to boot) here that would be a) adding noise and b) quite intellectually dishonest of him.

Or indeed, this could be just a harmless prank. Perhaps most of the conservatard noms here are leftie sockpuppets; that would explain a lot.

Anyway, not for me to decide.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:08 AM on May 25, 2005

Heywood, if you don't care, then why have you posted twelve times about it? And why do most of those posts often include huge reams of your "evidence" and various suppositions -- what, do you think you're Perry Mason or something?

I can't believe I'm going to quote EB here, but: The exhibition of obsessive mefi grudges does more to harm a person's credibility than almost anything else, I'd wager. If damaging your credibility was your objective here, then I'd say: mission accomplished. Bravo.
posted by casu marzu at 11:11 AM on May 25, 2005

carzu: tddl is clearly an admin apologist, which makes him an "asshat" IMV, so tddl posting here with faux-liberal sockpuppets wouldn't faze me much, in fact it would be something I would expect a Bush admin apologist asshat like him to do. Or the sockpuppetry could have been a tddl joke that didn't get the chance to unfold completely.

do you think you're Perry Mason or something?

Indeed, there is a Perry Mason element to this. It was fun drawing out tddl's explanation of how a tddl post at 8:43 last night arrived with a BIFE handle yet BIFE was capable of posting on another machine Sunday afternoon.

If damaging your credibility was your objective here

I would just hate for that to happen, that people would just crediblity on personality and not the content of their posts.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:20 AM on May 25, 2005

Perry Mason was a lawyer, not a detective. Paul Drake was the detective. Also, Paul Drake was much more attractive than Perry Mason. I'm still kind of up in the air about whether Della was sleeping with Paul or Perry. Or if Perry and Paul were sleeping with each other. Perhaps Heywood can find out for me.
posted by anapestic at 11:21 AM on May 25, 2005

I would just hate for that to happen, that people would just crediblity on personality and not the content of their posts.
but people are credibility on content of your post. Disposition? Unhealthy!!!
posted by boo_radley at 11:27 AM on May 25, 2005

As far as I can tell, the content of your post is your obsessive grudge against tddl. But apparently your point is that an obsessive grudge is perfectly fine and healthy so long as the object is someone of a different political persuasion. Thanks for clearing that up.
posted by casu marzu at 11:30 AM on May 25, 2005

I sense we are closing in on a freak-out.
posted by Mid at 11:32 AM on May 25, 2005

*grabs popcorn, notes he isn't on stage this time*
posted by AlexReynolds at 11:44 AM on May 25, 2005

Indeed, there is a Perry Mason element to this. It was fun drawing out tddl's explanation of how a tddl post at 8:43 last night arrived with a BIFE handle yet BIFE was capable of posting on another machine Sunday afternoon.

The implication being that last night BIFE was incapable of posting on said other machine, yes?

Why must he have been incapable? Why not just disinclined? Why not inclined toward outright mischief or fuckwitdom?

I lived in a house with other geeks. We used one another's computers. Very occasionally, we did so with (gently) malicious intent. This is not counter-intuitive.

The MeFi Scooby Squad has pulled off some good capers in the past, but this whole thing stinks of bullheaded supposition and assholery.
posted by cortex at 11:48 AM on May 25, 2005

casu marzu writes "If damaging your [Mogroot's] credibility was your objective here, then I'd say: mission accomplished"

casu marzu writes "As far as I can tell, the content of your [Mogroot's] post is your obsessive grudge against tddl. But apparently your point is that an obsessive grudge is perfectly fine and healthy so long as the object is someone of a different political persuasion. Thanks for clearing that up."


Ah, bullshit, casu. Mogroot did nothing more or less than point out the obvious. And it's pure nonsense for you to impugn Mogroot's credibility given that any reader of Mefi can independently see the same time-stamps Mogroot made reference to. If anything it increases Mogroot's credibility.

Presumably, you meant to impugn Mogroot's motivation but in your confusion, typed "credibility". As far as Mogroot's motivations, who cares? What he pointed out is the objective truth, and he shouldn't be slammed for stating it. Killing the messenger doesn't make the message any more or less accurate.


Now all that said, I disagree with tddl on a number of issues, but I also agree with him and value his consistent defense of free speech. I have no desire to "get" tddl or Mogroot, but frankly, tddl's explanation seems pretty bizarre to me.
posted by orthogonality at 11:49 AM on May 25, 2005

I'm with orthogonality, something just doesn't wash. But I don't really care.



And Michael Jackson and Diana Ross.

There's a really simple explanation for this, but I swore a celebrity-bound oath under pain of death not to tell anyone why. Sorry.

Boy, you got some 'splainin' to do!
posted by Specklet at 11:51 AM on May 25, 2005

I'll take this opportunity to confess that mathowie is just a puppet account I set up as a joke.
posted by goatdog at 12:03 PM on May 25, 2005

*grabs popcorn, notes he isn't on stage this time*

::YAWN::

unfunny...
posted by Dreamghost at 12:14 PM on May 25, 2005

(all together now)

"this is creeeeeeeeeeeeepy"
posted by quonsar at 12:15 PM on May 25, 2005

The implication being that last night BIFE was incapable of posting on said other machine, yes?

Again, this would not be such an interesting issue had not tddl posted at 8:29 PM and BIFE on 8:30 PM, according to tddl, from the same machine.

Why must he have been incapable? Why not just disinclined?

That one-minute gap implies some tight hotseating:

1) tddl posts at 8:29PM
2) tddl leaves his laptop
3) tddl's roommate switches logins and posts at 8:30PM
4) tddl returns to his laptop
5) tddl posts at 8:43PM, accidentally/unknowlingly as BIFE.

Why not inclined toward outright mischief or fuckwitdom?

Because tddl's explanation for how a tddl post arrived with a BIFE handle at 8:43 was that he "didn't know" BIFE had used his laptop to post to mf at 8:30, not that BIFE was a fuckwit (which going by BIFE's posting history is already strongly indicated)
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:32 PM on May 25, 2005

Heywood Mogroot writes "That one-minute gap implies some tight hotseating"

Even in my tiny, tiny apartment, where I use my laptop on the couch, I could have gotten up to go to the bathroom and not known it if my roommate sat down on the couch, switched users, posted, and got up and went into the kitchen before I got done in the bathroom and returned to my computer. Especially if the roommate were deliberately trying to cause trouble (it isn't clear to me if that is the case here).
posted by librarina at 12:38 PM on May 25, 2005

librarina: sure. I've said I'm willing to take tddl at his word that that somewhat unlikely chain of events explains how tddl accidentally posted as BIFE last night. The more likely explanation, IMV, is that BIFE is a tddl sockpuppet, but that would require discounting tddl's explanation as still more dishonesty/joking from him, a rather unproductive exercise, alas.

The admins checking the logs from Sunday to see if the BIFE and tddl posts came from the same IP (counter to tddl's relation of events) would be one way to get to the bottom of this, if anyone cared. Which I don't. Really.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:55 PM on May 25, 2005

unfunny...
posted by Dreamghost at 12:14 PM PST on May 25 [!]

::YAWNS::

unfunny...
posted by AlexReynolds at 12:56 PM on May 25, 2005

ortho, I wasn't confused when I wrote credibility, I was echoing the preceding quote in order to emphasize it. Conceded, it is not the best choice of words. It's an interesting choice, though, because HM's apparent motivation here is to undermine tddl's credibility, by way of pinning a deception regarding BIFE on him (something he more or less acknowledged, completely belying his repeated claim that he is magnanimously taking tddl at his word). It's the pursuit of this attack in over a dozen posts over the last twenty-four hours makes it look like an obsessive grudge. If he wants to summarily ignore tddl because he thinks tddl is an asshat admin apologist, that's his business, but the persistent badgering is simply indefensible.
posted by casu marzu at 12:57 PM on May 25, 2005

MetaTalk: we're all spinning our wheels over nothing here.
posted by MrMoonPie at 1:02 PM on May 25, 2005

I'd say Colonel Mustard in the Library with the Lead Pipe, if I was a bettin' man.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:21 PM on May 25, 2005

Anyone else get the feeling that adding thread closure to MeTa has actually caused more threads full of shit to be posted?
posted by graventy at 1:57 PM on May 25, 2005

Boy, you got some 'splainin' to do!

Specklet, those are impersonators and I've got the wigs to prove it.
posted by AlexReynolds at 2:07 PM on May 25, 2005

Speaking of wigs, I want a video of the Bay/beer meetup with intro by Don King.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 2:11 PM on May 25, 2005

But if matt doesn't care about this I sure don't either.

A clear untruth.

tddl is clearly an admin apologist, which makes him an "asshat" IMV

I'm not going to bother going through the archives, but I'm pretty sure tddl is far from an admin apologist, he just says things that don't fit the standard-issue MeFi boilerplate, so he's automatically taken for a Bushie by those whose brains can't take too much exercise.

I've said I'm willing to take tddl at his word

Also a clear untruth.

Advantage: tddl. Sorry, Mogroot. Better luck next time.
posted by languagehat at 2:50 PM on May 25, 2005

Don King?

posted by peacay at 2:55 PM on May 25, 2005

noel redding.
posted by quonsar at 3:03 PM on May 25, 2005

because HM's apparent motivation here is to undermine tddl's credibility, by way of pinning a deception regarding BIFE on him

Let's make this simple.

1) tddl posted as BIFE last night accidentally.
2) Given BIFE's recent account creation, and BIFE's short posting history, it would not be unreasonable to assume that BIFE is a tddl sockpuppet, tddl's explanation of the rogue roommate posting one minute after him (on the same machine) notwithstanding.
3) Server logs for Sunday, should they exist, could disprove tddl's claim that BIFE's first post to ML came from a different machine than his.
4) Do I really really care about this? No. If Matt doesn't care to pursue this you won't hear anything more about this from me.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:03 PM on May 25, 2005

I don't really care one way or another, but I do think it's funny that TDDL posted a picture of two random guys that I wouldn't know from Adam as "photographic evidence" that two different people were doing this.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 3:21 PM on May 25, 2005

But... but it's obviously tddl! I mean, just look at the eyes!
posted by casu marzu at 3:28 PM on May 25, 2005

This is crackerjack detectivework. Seriously.

posted by boo_radley at 3:48 PM on May 25, 2005

Apparently the point of this thread is to do elaborate research on something stupid and then say "But I don't care about this, really." So here's my go at it:


But like I said, I don't care at all about the actual particulars of this,
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:46 AM PST on May 25 [!]

If nobody else cares then that's the end of this l'affaire BIFE as far as I'm concerned.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:53 AM PST on May 25 [!]

It was an interesting exercise in forensics, both written and technical. Good night.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 1:11 AM PST on May 25 [!]

Is there anything more to this? It sounds like we're all spinning our wheels over nothing here.
posted by mathowie at 2:14 AM PST on May 25 [!]

But if matt doesn't care about this I sure don't either.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 10:53 AM PST on May 25 [!]

posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:03 AM PST on May 25 [!]

Anyway, not for me to decide.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:08 AM PST on May 25 [!]

posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:20 AM PST on May 25 [!]

posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:32 PM PST on May 25 [!]

would be one way to get to the bottom of this, if anyone cared. Which I don't. Really.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 12:55 PM PST on May 25 [!]

Do I really really care about this? No. If Matt doesn't care to pursue this you won't hear anything more about this from me.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:03 PM PST on May 25 [!]


Since it's been a whopping 1 hour since you last told everyone how little you cared about this, I'm hoping you've finally shut up. But I don't care about this, really.
posted by shmegegge at 4:17 PM on May 25, 2005

Don't forget the part about re-posting a closed thread. How's that for not caring!
posted by Mid at 4:22 PM on May 25, 2005

3) Server logs for Sunday, should they exist, could disprove tddl's claim that BIFE's first post to ML came from a different machine than his.

I've done this kind of fraud investigation and you need a couple of things. You need an IP address, for one thing, but that won't necessarily shed any light on this. If it's a shared internet connection like most people have these days, then both computers will have the same apparent IP.

For this reason, the site needs to set a machine cookie that's inconspicuous and unique. That's the only way to tell two machines behind a home router apart. I highly doubt that MetaFilter is setting a machine cookie.

For another thing, why the FUCK would tddl have chimed in to say "OH SHIT THAT'S MY ROOMMATE SORRY" in the first place? Up until that point, was anyone suspecting him of being the man behind the sock puppet?

This "detective work" is limp at best. Get a life.
posted by scarabic at 5:03 PM on May 25, 2005

I obviously waited way too long to start drinking tonight.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 5:18 PM on May 25, 2005

scarabic writes "If it's a shared internet connection like most people have these days, then both computers will have the same apparent IP. "

You must have missed the part where tddl told us that there is only one machine involved.

"For this reason, the site needs to set a machine cookie that's inconspicuous and unique. That's the only way to tell two machines behind a home router apart. I highly doubt that MetaFilter is setting a machine cookie."

MetaFilter sets a bunch of cookies. In fact, each Metafilter sub domain (ask, meta) has separate cookies.

But that really doesn't matter. The take-home message is that tddl's and Bush's posts were closely and suspiciously interleaved.

scarabic writes "For another thing, why the FUCK would tddl have chimed in to say 'OH SHIT THAT'S MY ROOMMATE SORRY' in the first place? Up until that point, was anyone suspecting him of being the man behind the sock puppet?"

Because tddl thought that mathowie would soon be checking server logs, and he wanted to explain away what would otherwise look like a pretty a good indication of sock-puppetry. tddl's explanations since just don't ring true -- the quick explanation of a sneaky roommate, the instance said roommate's ass had been kicked followed by a promise to kick the ass in the future, then the tale of a visit to the girlfriend's, the repeated insistence on "I'll buy you a beer, Mogroot", and the source-less photo of two guys who might ort might not be tddl and bush, all that rather than righteous anger seems to me a tip-off that tddl knows he's done something shady.


Now look, I have no dog in this fight, but it distresses me to see Mogroot being dumped on just for pointing out the obvious. Let me be clear that I'm not looking for anyone to be banned or any other such foolishness, but I just don't like to see this killing of the messenger.
posted by orthogonality at 5:27 PM on May 25, 2005

I've done this kind of fraud investigation and you need a couple of things. You need an IP address, for one thing, but that won't necessarily shed any light on this. If it's a shared internet connection like most people have these days, then both computers will have the same apparent IP.

Actually, tddl made the claim:

I think the whole point is that he wasn't "messing with me" because I was miles away and he was enjoying the subtle political discussions on MeFi in his own way.

that the roommate making posts as BIFE was 'miles away' from him on Sunday afternoon.

Now it is possible that, even if the server logs show the same IP for these 3 posts:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

that tddl has a home network and was VPN'ing into his home machine(s) from wherever he was posting from in Berkeley.

This hypothesis would be more supported if the Sunday IP matches Tuesday's IP.

'course the existence of multiple machines at his home makes his explanation of how his nefarious roommate managed to crank out a post last night with a timestamp one minute after tddl's last post (8:30PM vs 8:29PM) somewhat... dubious.

why the FUCK would tddl have chimed in to say "OH SHIT THAT'S MY ROOMMATE SORRY" in the first place?

because tddl accidentally posted with BIFE logged in as the current user at 8:43PM last night.

His explanation is that his roommate had used his computer to make the 8:30 post, leaving BIFE as the logged in user without him knowing about it.

A simpler, perhaps more believable explanation is that tddl was engaging in a little sockpuppetry last night, doing such entertainingly dishonest things as reforming one of my arguments into a falsified strawman version (extending, in BIFE's voice, my "asshat" appellation from Bush administration apologists to all Republican voters), and attacking tddl (ie himself) in BIFE's loony left-wing voice (which oddly does not quite match BIFE's first-ever post to mf on Sunday)).

HTH.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:30 PM on May 25, 2005

You must have missed the part where tddl told us that there is only one machine involved.

see my immediate above. Sunday, when BIFE first appeared on the scene, is different, according to tddl, from last night.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:32 PM on May 25, 2005

it distresses me to see Mogroot being dumped on

When you've got the facts, bang the facts.
When you've got the logic, bang the logic.
When you've got the table, bang the table.
When you've got nothing, bang the poster.

Part of this was the fun of seeing how far the rabbit hole the denial of pretty obvious facts and clear logic would be taken.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:35 PM on May 25, 2005

because tddl accidentally posted with BIFE logged in as the current user at 8:43PM last night.

But that doesn't stand to reason. There's still nothing about that comment that really forces him to reveal himself as tddl.

Now it is possible ... that tddl has a home network and was VPN'ing into his home machine(s) from wherever he was posting from in Berkeley.

I'm not following all the details here, obviously I missed a few above, but I'm still not seeing the burden of proof fulfilled, Matt doesn't seem to care, few others seem to care, many others use sock puppets, many comments are deleted per day... so it seems much ado about little.

I'm not one to dump on someone for caring about the good of the site, though, so forgive the "get a life" comment, which was stupid.
posted by scarabic at 5:44 PM on May 25, 2005

There's still nothing about that comment that really forces him to reveal himself as tddl.

? With his 8:43 PM post last night tddl exposed the fact that tddl and BIFE were posting from the same machine...

Explanations:

1) Sockpuppet! (the obvious inference)

2) Roommate sneaking the 8:30PM post as BIFE on his machine right after his 8:29PM tddl post, leaving BIFE as the logged in user on tddl's laptop

but I'm still not seeing the burden of proof fulfilled

I'm just presenting the facts as I see them. Obviously the burden of proof is subjective in this case.

Matt doesn't seem to care, few others seem to care

Well, given how tddl just professed, in his unfortunate post as BIFE:

"On other threads I've questioned other people who were acting in ways that didn't live up to a community standard"

I just thought it curious that tddl was quite possibly in the midst of engaging in a little of it himself. At 8:12PM I had already gathered that BIFE was a sockpuppet or throwaway of somebody's and decided to ignore him.

many others use sock puppets, many comments are deleted per day... so it seems much ado about little.

Well, what can I say. I value mf and seek to add my perspectives when I have something to say. Even with my two parenthetical "asshat" call-outs [1] [2] I feel I constructively contributed to last night's discussion on Iraq.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 6:05 PM on May 25, 2005

(addendum:)

BIFE, on the other hand was derailing the discussion and if tddl, and not his dastardly misbehaving roommate was the guy behind that I hope this extended gumshoe work will prevent future occurences of this.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 6:11 PM on May 25, 2005

(addendum 2:)

Perhaps this from tddl at 7:09 PM also piqued my interest in the sockpuppet hypothesis: "The real troll here is you."

with the follow-on BIFE shot, allegedly from from tddl's roommate, at 7:26 PM:

Fuck you tddl, administration whore! Take your red-state nonsense back to LGF, your not welcome here.

Either the roommate is quite the card, or tddl is one piece of work in constructing attacks at himself with a sockpuppet.

Which side you fall on is indeed a subjective judgement.

I'm willing to accept tddl's peacepipes above and do in fact wish I could have made it up to SF today to laugh at this over a beer or three.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 6:25 PM on May 25, 2005

Wait, I thought the reason "new user" signups were turned back on was so we all got a bunch of sock puppets.
posted by stet at 6:52 PM on May 25, 2005

"Oh shit that was my roommate/brother/friend" is the oldest excuse in the book of Sockpuppetry and Trolling (Random House, 1983).
posted by fleacircus at 7:45 PM on May 25, 2005

No, "that was my next door neighbor, the other famous Portuguese author" is the oldest excuse.
posted by Mid at 8:12 PM on May 25, 2005

Okey-dokey ... late to this thread. Can somone please summarize what all this chatter is about? Pretend I'm a sixth-grader.
posted by ericb at 9:17 PM on May 25, 2005

Geesh - *someone*
posted by ericb at 9:17 PM on May 25, 2005

Also, I would like to point out that "sock puppetry" rhymes with "cock bucketry." You know, just as a public service for any aspiring MeFiSongwriters.
posted by stet at 9:18 PM on May 25, 2005

MetaFilter: It's sock puppets all the way down...

ericb: Someone is a sock puppet.
No I'm not.
Yes you are, but I don't care.
Yes you care, look at # of posts.
Yeah, but you're a sockpuppet, however I still don't care.
Yes, I mean no.
I still don't care, but sockpuppetry is the only explanation (other than your explanation).
then...
Hey, nice detective work.
That's easy, anyone could do it.
But only a detective who cares could carry it out in such detailed fashion.
Or a detective who's not credible.
Or one with motive.
then...
Why is Phil Spector sitting on a Van de Graaff generator?

Hope that helps.

By the way, I've just recently been wondering:Who cares less:
a) the person who could care less
or
b) the person who couldn't care less?
posted by birdsquared at 9:52 PM on May 25, 2005

Can somone please summarize what all this chatter is about?

Sure:

<null>
posted by dg at 9:56 PM on May 25, 2005

That's it! POLL!

Everyone who thinks that it doesn't matter even if TDDL did use a sock puppet account to wreak havoc, say aye.

fuckin' aye.
posted by shmegegge at 10:16 PM on May 25, 2005

I don't know....I'd like to abstain. or even veto.
posted by dhruva at 11:33 PM on May 25, 2005

ericb: Can somone please summarize what all this chatter is about? Pretend I'm a sixth-grader.

On Sunday, the metafilter user account BushIsForEating made this gem his first post for us:

"Let's have another MeFi circlejerk!"
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22

Note that Metafilter user thedevildancedlightly was also present on metafilter at this time, bracketing the above post with two of his own posts:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

Then last night BIFE returned to metafilter here, engaging in rather puerile bashing of tddl and republicans in general.

Unfortunately, at 8:43 PM a post unequivocally authored in tddl's voice showed up with a BIFE handle.

Then at 8:51 PM tddl comes up and says the 8:43 BIFE post is indeed his (before anyone noticed this) and not BIFE's, and preemptively explained that it was due to his roommate using tddl's machine (a laptop) for BIFE's 8:30 mefi post, thus leaving the current metafilter user logged in as BIFE, which tddl then failed to change for his 8:43 post.

I found this somewhat curious so I went back to the timestamps, and saw that tddl had posted at 8:29 PM, leaving just a minute or two for BIFE to hot-seat onto tddl's computer to make BIFE's 8:30PM-timestamped post.

Getting back to the May 22 BIFE issue, tddl has confirmed for us that he was posting from Berkeley on that day (Sunday), making the close correlation between his posts that afternoon and BIFE's first post for us at that time simple coincidence, and not another case of his devilish roommate mysteriously hotseating on tddl's machine to make his idiotic BIFE posts.

I pointed out that, with this information, should the server logs show an identical IP address for this May 22 tddl/BIFE posting sequence:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

then that, short of tddl VPN'ing home or to wherever his roommate had posted from at that time, would be pretty unassailable evidence that tddl had been using the BIFE nom as a sockpuppet (if the 8:29 tddl and 8:30 PM BIFE posts from the same machine isn't convincing enough for you).

That is all.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 11:56 PM on May 25, 2005

And we should care about this because ...?
posted by dg at 3:57 AM on May 26, 2005

Shocking revelation: He can only type one word because he doesn't have a spacebar!
posted by furtive at 5:39 AM on May 26, 2005

>and we should care about this because ...?

If it's sockpuppetry, then he's trying to direct, create noise or troll because actually writing or linking to something that explains his view is seen as futile. If that's what MetaFilter is about then that's OK.

OR: he's just conversing with himself. His split political personality has spilt over the site and it's a cry for help. Boo hoo!
posted by gsb at 5:58 AM on May 26, 2005

And we should care about this because ...?

Because we all love to see people hoisted by their own petard, silly.
posted by qwip at 6:07 AM on May 26, 2005

Because we all love to see people hoisted by their own petard, silly

That's hoist, past participle of to hoise 'To raise aloft, lift up' (in the OED's definition). It's often mistaken for the modern verb to hoist. Not that I care about any of this, you understand. I don't care if Matt doesn't. But I'll make the same point several more times in this thread. Because I don't care so very, very much.
posted by languagehat at 6:56 AM on May 26, 2005

This thread was like reading a mystery, and, at the end, having the brilliant detective go "I got nothing."
posted by boaz at 9:07 AM on May 26, 2005

Can one or more of the participants by hosed by their own petard(s)?
posted by anapestic at 9:21 AM on May 26, 2005

That's hoist, past participle of to hoise 'To raise aloft, lift up' (in the OED's definition). It's often mistaken for the modern verb to hoist. Not that I care about any of this, you understand. I don't care if Matt doesn't. But I'll make the same point several more times in this thread. Because I don't care so very, very much.

Touché

God I hope I used/spelled that correctly...
posted by qwip at 9:54 AM on May 26, 2005

Languagehat for the win.
posted by LarryC at 10:07 AM on May 26, 2005

If this is Heywood not caring, I shudder to think about what it's like when he does care.
posted by Termite at 10:33 AM on May 26, 2005

A simpler, perhaps more believable explanation is that tddl was engaging in a little sockpuppetry last night, doing such entertainingly dishonest things as reforming one of my arguments into a falsified strawman version (extending, in BIFE's voice, my "asshat" appellation from Bush administration apologists to all Republican voters), and attacking tddl (ie himself) in BIFE's loony left-wing voice (which oddly does not quite match BIFE's first-ever post to mf on Sunday)).

It's really difficult to believe that you're a)not caring and b)willing to take tddl at his word if you keep pushing your theories without proof.
posted by dflemingdotorg at 10:59 AM on May 26, 2005

But what do the server logs say?!? Won't someone think of the children...?

(I just don't want all the excitement to end)
posted by qwip at 11:04 AM on May 26, 2005

It's really difficult to believe that you're a)not caring and b)willing to take tddl at his word if you keep pushing your theories without proof.

I said I don't care if nobody else cares, and am willing to give tddl the benefit of the (big) doubt (in the interests of moving on).

I don't see what's so hard to understand with this, but it has been an interesting experience nonetheless.

But what do the server logs say?!?

ah, it's not the kill, but the thrill of the chase. I couldn't care less what the server logs say.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 1:03 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood, I think what's causing the communication difficulties here is that your being "willing to give...the benefit of the (big doubt)" is essentially a meaningless sentiment.

What you're really saying is that you don't believe him, but you're planning to let it lie and not make too much more of a fuss about it.

"Giving the benefit of the doubt" while maintaining such obvious reservations would only be meaningful if you had some sort of authority, say, if you had the ability to ban a user, but were going to refrain from doing so in spite of your misgivings. Then you would be giving him the benefit of the doubt.

As it is, maintaining the thrill of the chase is precisely not giving the benefit of the doubt, since this complaining/investigating is all you have the power to do anyway. Hence, people not taking your "benefit of the doubt" comments as you feel they should.

That said, I think you're probably right. And this has been interesting. No complaints from me.
posted by nobody at 1:23 PM on May 26, 2005

NSFW
unfunny...
posted by Dreamghost at 12:14 PM PST on May 25 [!]

::YAWNS::

unfunny...
posted by AlexReynolds at 12:56 PM PST on May 25 [!]

::YAWNS::

unfunny...
posted by Dreamghost at 1:26 PM on May 26, 2005

That said, I think you're probably right. And this has been interesting. No complaints from me.

It would have been more interesting with chainsaws, but otherwise, I think you're right.
posted by anapestic at 2:22 PM on May 26, 2005

that your being "willing to give...the benefit of the (big doubt)" is essentially a meaningless sentiment.

It was a device to introduce some mild chastisement in a somewhat jocular way for this particular instance of (apparent) asshattery from tddl.

Whoah, I'm going meta-argument on metatalk on metafilter.
Somebody hold me.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 2:49 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood, with each response it becomes increasingly clear why you've made 25 comments on a topic that you purportedly care nothing about. and. why. you. stubbornly. refuse. to. let. it. drop.

You haven't really added information in most of those comments; you just keep delineating the same details of your suspicions over and over again. It really looks as if you absolutely must have the last word. The last time someone around here was that obstinate, it didn't work out so well.

I'm drawing a line right here and daring you to prove me wrong by not adding any more comments after it.

---

posted by casu marzu at 3:21 PM on May 26, 2005

This thread was like reading a mystery, and, at the end, having the brilliant detective go "I got nothing."

I fail to see how I could have presented a stronger case for sockpuppetry here.

I was the one who checked the timestamps to see that there was a one minute gap between a tddl post and bife's on the same machine, without tddl knowing:

"didn't realize that he'd logged in on my computer until I posted"

making tddl's roommate explanation somewhat unbelievable.

I was also the one to elicit further details from tddl regarding the circumstances of Sunday's tddl/BIFE posting, sufficient that a simple check of the server logs could prove the case (the same IPs would further put tddl's roommate story in doubt since tddl stated his roommate was "miles away" at that time).

Like I said this was more an exercise in forensics for me. If matt doesn't want to do anything with this fine by me.

Putting party before country (which is what I see Bush admin apologists here doing) is a much greater example of asshattery than making some stupid sockpuppet attempts here, and, for that, nobody needs my formidable investigative talents.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:27 PM on May 26, 2005

damn, missed the deadline by |this much|
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:29 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood Mogroot accuses thedevildancedlightly of doing something that is done regularly by many other members.

He presents insinuations and circumstantial evidence, at best, as proof that thedevildancedlightly is the doer of these dirty deeds.

What a waste of a thread.
posted by event at 3:33 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood Mogroot accuses thedevildancedlightly of doing something that is done regularly by many other members.

ah, but the BIFE account constructed a strawman version of my own argument, piquing my interest in this sorry affair.

insinuations and circumstantial evidence

That tddl posted at 8:29PM and the user account BIFE posted at 8:30PM on the same machine is a fact, unless tddl is willing to assert that his 8:29PM post came from some other machine in the tddl domicile.

That BIFE's first appearance here is tightly bracketed by tddl's own:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:16 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

is of course circumstantial evidence, but it did lead to tddl providing more details that could make his story more unlikely should matt choose to disclose the logged IPs for those posts.

That the posting content of BIFE here is consistent with BIFE being a tddl sockpuppet is a reasonable judgement, not an insination IMV.

What a waste of a thread.

yeah, think of the children.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 3:50 PM on May 26, 2005

What a waste of a thread.
Seconded.

As of right now, Heywood Mogroot has posted a total of of 28 comments to MeTa, and 26 of them were to this thread. On a topic he declares he "doesn't care about" since two hours and five posts in. 21 comments & 40+ hours later, he still claims he doesn't care, yet goes on at length to make his point.

on preview: I wrote all those numbers before his latest comment. Another point towards insanity.

I'd hate to see when Heywood Mogroot DOES care about an issue.

hey Matt - can you close this and let the insanity be over? Please?

or, even better, in the interest of "self policing" Heywood Mogroot can you just drop it?
posted by raedyn at 4:00 PM on May 26, 2005

he still claims he doesn't care, yet goes on at length to make his point.

I don't care about sticking tddl to the wall on this, but I will defend any arguments I've made here.

If you want me to shut up here, stop responding to my posts or otherwise referencing me.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:03 PM on May 26, 2005

[this is still stupid]
posted by mischief at 4:10 PM on May 26, 2005

but you're not defending your points. the points people are taking issue with are when you say things like "if matt doesn't care, then I won't pursue this any more." then matt says "this is a fuss over nothing." and then you KEEP GOING.

then you say things like "this is the last you'll hear from me on this." then you write another 15 posts.

then you say things like "I'm giving tddl the benefit of the doubt" except that, as has been pointed out previously, you continue to line up inconclusive evidence against him that you've already provided 15 other times.

what people care about is that what you depict as some kind of innocent sport is ACTUALLY picking on a respected member of the community. stop. you're being a dick and a liar.
posted by shmegegge at 4:23 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood Mogroot: That tddl posted at 8:29PM and the user account BIFE posted at 8:30PM on the same machine is a fact...

It's still circumstantial.

Your detective bit needs some work.
posted by event at 4:27 PM on May 26, 2005

It's still circumstantial.

:) all factual evidence here, short of a jury trial's proceedings with sworn testimony and all, is circumstantial.

If you're willing to believe that tddl's roommate could/would make a post timestamped one minute after tddl did, on the same machine, without tddl's knowledge, then great.

But I don't think the inference:

if someone posts at 8:29, chances are pretty good that that same person is posting at 8:30

is unreasonable; it is the obvious inference to me. But since that is counter to tddl's explanation, I'm willing to go along with it for the good of the community.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 4:52 PM on May 26, 2005

"this is a fuss over nothing."

What Matt said:

"This new user sounds like a mess, but the first comment says that they'll try and cool it, so I said that maybe the problem is solved and I'll watch the account.

Is there anything more to this?"

indicates he is not aware of the factual evidence of BIFE being a tddl sockpuppet.

And as I've said, if he doesn't care I don't care. So far he has not weighed in on this, and given the rather dicey balance of powers on mf, I don't particularly wish him to. I can handle my own end fine.

then you say things like "this is the last you'll hear from me on this." then you write another 15 posts.

I meant outside of this thread. Obviously I will continue to defend my lines of argument here as I see fit, regardless of the many pleas to stop for the sake of the children or what have you.

is ACTUALLY picking on a respected member of the community

Some people here have a problem with uncomfortable facts. I get it.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:00 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood Mogroot is my sock puppet. ;-P
posted by mischief at 5:06 PM on May 26, 2005

I decided to step out of this thread a while ago because it was getting ridiculous, I'd proven my point, and Heywood promised to put a stop to it. Twenty-four hours later he's still tilting at windmills. Here's my last statement on the matter.

Some people here have a problem with uncomfortable facts. I get it.

I offered a clear explanation that fit the facts and was supported by other posters, Heywood denied it. I offered to meet Heywood in person and bring all the parties involved along, a very concrete fact if you ask me. He declined to see actual proof, instead posting the same timestamps over and over despite pleas to stop and move on with life.

I'm willing to go along with it for the good of the community.

Then why are you still posting about it? That has moved from a questionable statement to an outright lie. You are clearly not willing to go along with it or else you would have stopped 15+ posts ago. You've been called on that several times and everyone sees through your passive-aggresive charade. Just stand up like a man and admit that you don't want to go along with it, or stop lying through your teeth. It's pretty transparent.

tddl is clearly an admin apologist, which makes him an "asshat" IMV, so tddl posting here with faux-liberal sockpuppets wouldn't faze me much, in fact it would be something I would expect a Bush admin apologist asshat like him to do

Since you've gone through the trouble to question my motives, now I get to question yours.

Fact 1: You have been presented with a clear offer of physical proof and you have turned it down. Fact 2: You think I am a "Bush admin apologist asshat" and a "conservatard". Fact 3: You've spent 48 hours harping on circumstantial "evidence" that you think somehow discredits me.

I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for the first 24 hours (notice by "give the benefit of the doubt" I mean "not post about it every 20 minutes"), but now I'm going to call you out on using this as a political weapon to discredit your ideological opponents. The first 24 hours might have been excused as a legitimate help to the community - you noticed something suspicious and you got interested. Pursuing it for another 24 hours after everybody else long stopped caring and called you out on it is a sign that you have a personal grudge here.

I can't see what goes on inside your head, but it wouldn't be an unreasonable inference (you seem to like that term) to assume that this is an elaborate attempt to discredit me because you don't like my politics. It's one thing to investigate something, it's another to spend 48 hours and 20+ posts harping on it. That's pretty childish. Like you said, "When you've got nothing, bang the poster."

It's also possible you just dislike me personally, in which case acting your childish grudge out on MeTa is pretty weak as well.

Either way, you've presented all of the "evidence" you have. It was presented 24 hours ago. Let it go. Move on with your life and drop the personal attack.

If anybody has any questions please feel free to email me personally at dt -at- domainsource -dot- net. I'd be happy to answer them. This ridiculous thread has gone on long enough. I'm sure Heywood will post to try and get the last word in, but I don't think I'm going to read it. See you all on the blue.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 5:32 PM on May 26, 2005

You don't get anything -- if you did, you would have moved on about twenty-four hours ago. If you think you're arguments stand on their own (as I believe you do), then fine, LET THEM STAND. THEY AREN'T GOING ANYWHERE. You don't need to keep regurgitating them every twenty minutes. Every repititious comment you make is much more revealing about you than tddl.


So far he has not weighed in on this, and given the rather dicey balance of powers on mf, I don't particularly wish him to. I can handle my own end fine.

The rather dicey balance of powers? What in the hell are you talking about? You can handle your own end? Dear God, it sounds like you think you're in a Western or an action movie. Step AWAY from the computer, and go outside RIGHT. NOW.

I figured you for just a monstrously stubborn, mildly disturbed asshole, but I'm going to have to agree with raedyn. You're insane.
posted by casu marzu at 5:34 PM on May 26, 2005

At last--we're getting to the part where he cuts off his own hand.
posted by Mid at 5:44 PM on May 26, 2005

I'm waiting for that part too. Can we speed it up a little?
posted by exlotuseater at 6:05 PM on May 26, 2005

Eight freakin' hours ago, I wrote out the following comment, saw it in preview, and thought better of it.

STOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPIT

I've got to learn to stop trusting my better instincts.
posted by yhbc at 6:17 PM on May 26, 2005

tddl: Then why are you still posting about it? That has moved from a questionable statement to an outright lie.

I said I was willing to go along with your somewhat unbelievable explanation of how a tddl post arrived with a BIFE handle, provided matt (or the mods) were too.

It's a conditional thing.

Until the condition is satisfied, I will defend the case for you using a sockpuppet BIFE here, in this thread.

I will not reference this unfortunate episode outside of this thread, and am indeed willing to move on.

But I will defend the arguments I have made thus far, here.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 6:18 PM on May 26, 2005

STOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPITSTOPIT
posted by yhbc at 6:22 PM on May 26, 2005

But I will defend the arguments I have made thus far, here.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
posted by event at 6:28 PM on May 26, 2005

I vote Heywoodjablowme Maggot gets the banhammer.

Seconded?
posted by eyeballkid at 6:45 PM on May 26, 2005

Sure, I second that. I was getting tired of that account anyway.
posted by mischief at 6:56 PM on May 26, 2005

If this is still going on tomorrow morning, it will be proof that Matt is not reviewing this thread, in which case I'm gonna start filling it with cut'n'pasted copyrighted Scientology documents/scriptures. And possibly tubgirl.

Also, I am currently not wearing any pants. For reals.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 7:03 PM on May 26, 2005

If I get banned, can I have the BIFE account, tddl?
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 7:13 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood, I'm not sure I'm getting you. Could you please repeat your accusation and all of your evidence?
posted by LarryC at 7:13 PM on May 26, 2005

PinkStanlessTail is in danger of earning the "shmegegge's favorite poster" title... conditional on him/her fulfilling his/her promise.
posted by shmegegge at 7:14 PM on May 26, 2005

Heywood:

Some people here have a problem with uncomfortable facts. I get it.

No, you don't. People have a problem with thinly supported coincidence being touted around as incontrovertible evidence. EVERYTHING in tddl's explanation fits tidily. Nothing in your oft-repeated circumstantial evidence controverts his given explanation. Everyone here has said that it is possible and not even difficult to logout, re-login and post a short comment in the span of a minute. In fact...
posted by shmegegge at 7:19 PM on May 26, 2005

one minute.
posted by shmegegge at 7:19 PM on May 26, 2005

EVEN LESS THAN ONE MINUTE! and I logged out, and re-logged in, manually found the thread, and everything.
posted by shmegegge at 7:20 PM on May 26, 2005

This thread is hilarious. A+, Heywood.

Oh, and if anyone writes below this line, it means that Heywood should recap all his findings again.

---

posted by Armitage Shanks at 7:21 PM on May 26, 2005

so it's obvious, since you won't let it die and have already said that you don't care about the server logs, that you're just picking on tddl. That's bad form, and we want you to leave him alone. You're being an asshole.

Also:

indicates he is not aware of the factual evidence of BIFE being a tddl sockpuppet.

No, it doesn't. mathowie asked "is there anything more to this?" AFTER reading all your evidence, including the comment that started with "to sum up:" So, having been made aware of every piece of evidence you offered, he still thought it was a fuss over nothing. You haven't added anything new to the discussion, and it's clear that #1 doesn't care about this, but you're still going on. Stop picking on tddl. Just stop.
posted by shmegegge at 7:24 PM on May 26, 2005

damn you, armitage.
posted by shmegegge at 7:25 PM on May 26, 2005

Shut.



The.



Fuck.



Up.



Heywood Mogroot.




Please.
posted by dg at 7:32 PM on May 26, 2005

I'm still not sure I understand. Heywood, can you explain how the timing of the messages suggests that it was the same person using both accounts? Also, would server logs help to clarify it?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 7:41 PM on May 26, 2005

Hey you fellows, what's all this I hear about a strange series of messages? Would it be possible for one of you gents to recount the evidence for me in excruciating detail?
posted by Mid at 7:57 PM on May 26, 2005

Everyone here has said that it is possible and not even difficult to logout, re-login and post a short comment in the span of a minute. In fact...

That's not the issue with the 8:29 and 8:30 posts.

tddl said that his roommate had logged in and posted as BIFE on his machine, prior to his 8:43 post, without his knowledge.

The timestamp of BIFE's post prior to tddl's post at 8:43 was timestamped 8:30. But, interestingly enough, I found that tddl had a post timestamped at 8:29.

Let's walk through this. For BIFE to hotseat with tddl on tddl's laptop, without tddl's knowledge, in time to make that 8:30 post, is something that stretches credulity.

But hey, I've already said I'm willing to give tddl the benefit of the doubt on this. If the community a) doesn't buy this sockpuppet evidence or b) doesn't have a problem with tddl using sockpuppets to argue with me, then fine, Let's. Move. On.
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 9:20 PM on May 26, 2005

Does anyone else hear an uncanny echo in here?
posted by peacay at 9:39 PM on May 26, 2005

I don't buy the sock puppet evidence.

I don't have a problem with tddl using sock puppets to argue with you.
posted by event at 9:40 PM on May 26, 2005

Lest we forget.
posted by dhruva at 9:56 PM on May 26, 2005

I'm still waiting for someone to be burned in their tank. Are we still doing that?
posted by eyeballkid at 10:11 PM on May 26, 2005

Tiddles and Biffy are really both ME, scarabic's sock-puppet.

But anyway. Who fucking cares? I want to know if Kwantsar and quonsar are different people.
posted by davy at 10:21 PM on May 26, 2005

I'm waiting for PinkStainlessTail's Scientology postings. Tom Cruise told me, personally, tonight that the drugs, that keep me from imagining that famous people are talking directly to me from the TV, are going to kill me.
posted by birdsquared at 10:28 PM on May 26, 2005

posted by Hands of Manos at 11:08 PM on May 26, 2005

you know, every time I see that image I think, "Does that girl know what's happened to her innocent beach romping?"
posted by shmegegge at 11:35 PM on May 26, 2005

dhruva has just won the "shmegegge's favorite poster award" for having linked to that lest we forget blog. PinkStainlessTail is still in the running, provided the Scientology material is posted... and possibly tubgirl. Barring that occurrence, however, dhruva is currently:


posted by shmegegge at 11:56 PM on May 26, 2005 [1 favorite]

Holy. Shit. The partyThis thread is still going? Why are you all still here? What the hell happened to all mythe beer? GO HOME! NO BEER! NO BEER HERE! GO HOME!

And why am I wearing only a pair of beery combat boots, with visions of sugar-plums slam dancing in my poor, sore head? Why is there blood all over the floor? What's with the charred corpse in the corner?

Also: WHERE THE FUCK IS MY PANTSFISH?

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I had one when this party started.
posted by loquacious at 1:44 AM on May 27, 2005

wow: thanks shmegegge. I'm honoured :)
posted by dhruva at 3:25 AM on May 27, 2005

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I had one when this party started.

Eponymous Blargh ate it.
posted by quonsar at 5:24 AM on May 27, 2005

posted by grapefruitmoon at 6:05 AM on May 27, 2005

My larger collection isn't with me here at work, but here's a widely available section of the famous OT III document:

The head of the Galactic Federation (76 planets around larger stars visible from here) (founded 5,000,000 years ago, very space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet, 178 billion on average) by mass implanting. He caused people to be brought to Teegeeack (Earth) and put an H-Bomb on the principal volcanos (Incident II) and then the Pacific area ones were taken in boxes to Hawaii and the Atlantic area ones to Las Palmas and there "packaged".

His name was Xenu. He used renegades. Various misleading data by means of circuits etc. was placed in the implants.

When through with his crime loyal officers (to the people) captured him after six years of battle and put him in an electronic mountain trap where he still is. "They" are gone. The place (Confederation) has since been a desert. The length and brutality of it all was such that this Confederation never recovered. The implant is calculated to kill (by pneumonia etc) anyone who attempts to solve it. This liability has been dispensed with by my tech development.

One can freewheel through the implant and die unless it is approached as precisely outlined. The "freewheel" (auto-running on and on) lasts too long, denies sleep etc and one dies. So be careful to do only Incidents I and II as given and not plow around and fail to complete one thetan at a time.

In December 1967 I knew someone had to take the plunge. I did and emerged very knocked out, but alive. Probably the only one ever to do so in 75,000,000 years. I have all the data now, but only that given here is needful.

One's body is a mass of individual thetans stuck to oneself or to the body.

One has to clean them off by running incident II and Incident I. It is a long job, requiring care, patience and good auditing. You are running beings. They respond like any preclear. Some large, some small.

Thetans believed they were one. This is the primary error. Good luck.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 6:14 AM on May 27, 2005

Well, if we are not visited by BIFE again it would be no geat loss.

Anyone who uses a sock-puppet account to add noise to Metafilter in anything but a totally irreverent post is wasting bandwidth.
posted by asok at 6:31 AM on May 27, 2005

Let's walk through this.

Oh my. Since no one else has, I guess it falls to me to spell this out for you, Heywood. See, all the posts that were asking if we could go over the "evidence" again in detail - those were sarcastic. If you read between the lines, what they were really, truly, yet oh-so-subtly saying was the same as this comment.

Your posting yet again with still more rehashing of the same content (including the hilarious refrain that you continue to "give tddl the benefit of the doubt") has managed to make you even more of a clown than when you (re)started this thread.

Congrats, I guess.
posted by soyjoy at 6:45 AM on May 27, 2005

Holy crap, are you guys still talking about this?
posted by grouse at 7:02 AM on May 27, 2005

It will be a dark day for MeTa when this thread finally scrolls off the front page. It's become a much more interesting train wreck as it's evolved.

I hope that sometime soon someone introduces sockpuppet wrestling as an event at a MeFi meetup.
posted by anapestic at 7:17 AM on May 27, 2005

Googly eyes mandatory.
posted by mediareport at 7:31 AM on May 27, 2005

Waitaminnit. That one has squinty eyes, not googly eyes. Damn.
posted by casu marzu at 7:39 AM on May 27, 2005

The Bo-Kaap is is an historic and culturally interesting area of Cape Town. A traditional residential area of Cape Town's Muslim community, the suburb is situated on the slopes of Signal Hill. You will find cobbled streets, brightly coloured houses from the nineteenth century, Muslim shrines ("kramats") and mosques.

Most of the residents are descended from slaves brought here by the Dutch in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. They came from Africa, India, Sri Lanka, and Malaysia, and elsewhere in Asia. They are known as "Cape Malays", even though this term is incorrect. Most of them are not descended from Malaysians.

The early Muslim slaves in Cape Town included famous scholars and religious leaders. Many others were skilled craftsmen and artisans. They have played a major role in the language and culture of Cape Town and South Africa.

Afrikaans, a language spoken by descendants of the Dutch and most "mixed race" people in South Africa, was originally developed by slaves. These people came from all over the world, and needed a language to speak amongst themselves and with their Dutch masters. Muslim scholars produced the first written texts in Afrikaans.

The Muslim community has also had a large influence on the cooking of South Africa. Cape Malay cuisine is delicious. It usually consists of a combination of fruit, spices, vegetables and meat. You can visit a restaurant in the Bo-Kaap where food is served in the traditional way: sitting on the floor and eating with your hands.
posted by languagehat at 7:53 AM on May 27, 2005

If I enjoyed reading this thread, does that make me a bad person?
posted by Loudmax at 8:08 AM on May 27, 2005

Only the good die young, Loudmax.
posted by anapestic at 8:13 AM on May 27, 2005

From "The Thunder, Perfect Mind" (Translated by George W. MacRae):

I was sent forth from the power,

and I have come to those who reflect upon me,
and I have been found among those who seek after me.
Look upon me, you who reflect upon me,
and you hearers, hear me.
You who are waiting for me, take me to yourselves.
And do not banish me from your sight.
And do not make your voice hate me, nor your hearing.
Do not be ignorant of me anywhere or any time. Be on your guard!
Do not be ignorant of me.
For I am the first and the last.
I am the honored one and the scorned one.
I am the whore and the holy one.
I am the wife and the virgin.
I am and the daughter.
I am the members of my mother.
I am the barren one
and many are her sons.
I am she whose wedding is great,
and I have not taken a husband.
I am the midwife and she who does not bear.
I am the solace of my labor pains.
I am the bride and the bridegroom,
and it is my husband who begot me.
I am the mother of my father
and the sister of my husband
and he is my offspring.
I am the slave of him who prepared me.
I am the ruler of my offspring.
But he is the one who begot me before the time on a birthday.
And he is my offspring in (due) time,
and my power is from him.
I am the staff of his power in his youth,
and he is the rod of my old age.
And whatever he wills happens to me.
I am the silence that is incomprehensible
and the idea whose remembrance is frequent.
I am the voice whose sound is manifold
and the word whose appearance is multiple.
I am the utterance of my name.
Why, you who hate me, do you love me,
and hate those who love me?
You who deny me, confess me,
and you who confess me, deny me.
You who tell the truth about me, lie about me,
and you who have lied about me, tell the truth about me.
You who know me, be ignorant of me,
and those who have not known me, let them know me.
For I am knowledge and ignorance.
I am shame and boldness.
I am shameless; I am ashamed.
I am strength and I am fear.
I am war and peace.
Give heed to me.
I am the one who is disgraced and the great one.
Give heed to my poverty and my wealth.
Do not be arrogant to me when I am cast out upon the earth,
and you will find me in those that are to come.
And do not look upon me on the dung-heap
nor go and leave me cast out,
and you will find me in the kingdoms.
And do not look upon me when I am cast out among those who
are disgraced and in the least places,
nor laugh at me.
And do not cast me out among those who are slain in violence.
But I, I am compassionate and I am cruel.
Be on your guard!
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 8:15 AM on May 27, 2005

Thunderstruck
By A. Young

(Thunder) (x10)
I was caught
In the middle of a railroad track (Thunder) [...of a lightning attack]
I looked round
And I knew there was no turning back (Thunder)
My mind raced
And I thought what could I do (Thunder)
And I knew
There was no help, no help from you (Thunder)

Sound of the drums
Beatin' in my heart
The thunder of guns
Tore me apart
You've been - thunderstruck

[Rode | Went] down the highway
Broke the limit, we hit the town
Went through to Texas, yeah Texas
And we had some fun
We met some girls
Some dancers who gave a good time
Broke all the rules, played all the fools
Yeah, yeah, they, they, they blew our minds

I was shakin' at the knees
Could I come again please?
Yeah the ladies were too kind
You've been - thunderstruck, thunderstruck
Yeah yeah yeah, thunderstruck

Yeah
Oh, thunderstruck, yeah

Now we're shaking at the knees
Could I come again please?

Thunderstruck, thunderstruck
Yeah yeah yeah, thunderstruck
Thunderstruck, yeah, yeah, yeah

Said yeah, it's alright
We're doing fine
Yeah, it's alright
We're doing fine
(So fine)

Thunderstruck, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Tunderstruck, thunderstruck, thunderstruck
Whoa baby, baby, thunderstruck
You've been thunderstruck, thunderstruck
Thunderstruck, thunderstruck, thunderstruck
You've been thunderstruck

-finis-
posted by Dreamghost at 9:05 AM on May 27, 2005

Let's review the evidence one more time:

1. BushIsForEating made 5 brief off-color remarks, and an additional comment that was actually written by thedevildancedlightly.
   
2. Heywood Mogroot made 1 post and 34 mostly lengthy comments to MetaTalk about how much he doesn't care that BushIsForEating is a sockpuppet of thedevildancedlightly.
   
3. The very first comment in this thread is Umm, didn't Matthowie say that we'd had enough of this?
   
4. There are currently 185 comments after that.
   
5. Profit!
   

In summary: excellent work, everyone! Operation Molehill into Mountain has been a rousing success! Champagne for everyone!

This thread will now repeat from the beginning following this line:

---

posted by casu marzu at 9:06 AM on May 27, 2005

Umm, didn't Matthowie say that we'd had enough of this?...
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 9:14 AM on May 27, 2005

Drop me an email if you want to talk, but I'm assuming there's a reason why the thread was closed...
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 9:16 AM on May 27, 2005

I like pancakes. Who here likes pancakes?
posted by cortex at 9:43 AM on May 27, 2005

Uh. I'm. Uh. dg's roommate.

shit
posted by cortex at 9:44 AM on May 27, 2005

why would I waste $5 to get called a troll more often then I am already?

well, the pattern of BIFE's short posting career here is basically covering your back:

His first post:

Since we know that the current American government is guilty of torture [...] what can we do about it?

Let's have another MeFi circlejerk!

Sounds like something you'd want to say if you weren't such a decent persona.

Next we have:

Every asshat who has ever voted Repuglican should be rounded up and moved to one of these nations. It's where they belong, with other fucking uncivilized barbarians.

Such a slam on you! Clever room-mate.

Two minutes later we have:

Fuck you tddl, administration whore! Take your red-state nonsense back to LGF, your not welcome here.

Pretending to be a leftie and slamming you so you look persecuted here. More cleverness.

Then, he responds to me calling him out on his obvious false-flag effort:

Hey, Im still here and Im going to be for a long time. Are you defending tddl now or something?

Again, very clever attack on you by mentioning you this way.

With a sample size of 2 it's hard to tell much of anything.

Well, doing more research I was able to bracket your roommates first post here:

thedevildancedlightly at 12:55 PM PST on May 22
BushIsForEating at 1:08 PM PST on May 22
thedevildancedlightly at 1:13 PM PST on May 22

So BIFE registered an account in the 13 minutes you left your computer unattended?

And you wrote your rather longish 1:13 PM post right after BIFE vacated your machine?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 9:53 AM on May 27, 2005

Uh. I'm. Uh. HM's roommate.

shit

Inspired by MetaChat:

posted by thedevildancedlightly at 9:55 AM on May 27, 2005

Ed, the greatest WYGIWYG editor of all.

ED IS THE TRUE PATH TO NIRVANA! ED HAS BEEN THE CHOICE OF EDUCATED AND IGNORANT ALIKE FOR CENTURIES! ED WILL NOT CORRUPT YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS!! ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! ED MAKES THE SUN SHINE AND THE BIRDS SING AND THE GRASS GREEN!!
posted by gramschmidt at 10:57 AM on May 27, 2005

Welcome back to the never-ending Kangaroo Court that is the grey.

If there's ever been a candidate for thread closure, this is it.
posted by grouse at 10:59 AM on May 27, 2005

I think it is weird the way dogs all try to sniff my crotch when I am jogging. Why does running make dogs want to give you a blowjob?
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 10:59 AM on May 27, 2005

Also, is there any way to keep them from biting in excitement?
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 10:59 AM on May 27, 2005

---

Umm, didn't Matthowie say that we'd had enough of this? posted by thedevildancedlightly at 10:54 PM PST on May 24 ... Drop me an email if you want to talk, but I'm assuming there's a reason why the thread was closed. posted by thedevildancedlightly at 10:55 PM PST on May 24 ... I like pancakes. Who here likes pancakes? posted by dg at 10:58 PM PST on May 24

---

posted by grouse at 11:08 AM on May 27, 2005

No no no. WIERD AL is the true path to Nirvana.

SMELLS LIKE NIRVANA LYRICS

What is this song all about?
Can't figure any lyrics out
How do the words to it go?
I wish you'd tell me, I don't know
Don't know, don't know, don't know, oh no
Don't know, don't know, don't know...
Now I'm mumblin' and I'm screamin'
And I don't know what I'm singin'
Crank the volume, ears are bleedin'
I still don't know what I'm singin'
We're so loud and incoherent
Boy, this oughta bug your parents
Yeah
It's unintel-ligible
I just can't get it through my skull
It's hard to bargle nawdle zouss(? )
With all these marbles in my mouth
Don't know, don't know, don't know, oh no
Don't know, don't know, don't know...
Well, we don't sound like madonna
Here we are now, we're nirvana
Sing distinctly? we don't wanna
Buy our album, we're nirvana
A garage band from seattle
Well, it sure beats raising cattle
Yeah
And I forgot the next verse
Oh well, I guess it pays to rehearse
The lyric sheet's so hard to find
What are the words? oh, nevermind
Don't know, don't know, don't know, oh no
Don't know, don't know, don't know...
Well, I'm yellin' and we're playin'
But I don't know what I'm sayin'
What's the message I'm conveyin'?
Can you tell me what I'm sayin'?
So have you got some idea?
Didn't think so -- well, I'll see ya
Sayonara, sayonara
Ayonawa, odinawa
Odinaya, yodinaya
Yaddayadda, yaaahyaaah
Ayaaaaaah!



(Hi Grouse!)
posted by davy at 11:18 AM on May 27, 2005

SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY

DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02

cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.

This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based.

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.

The two broad US options were:

(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).

(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.

The US saw the UK (and Kuwait) as essential, with basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus critical for either option. Turkey and other Gulf states were also important, but less vital. The three main options for UK involvement were:

(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus, plus three SF squadrons.

(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.

(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000, perhaps with a discrete role in Northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.

The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD. There were different strategies for dealing with Libya and Iran. If the political context were right, people would support regime change. The two key issues were whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan the space to work.

On the first, CDS said that we did not know yet if the US battleplan was workable. The military were continuing to ask lots of questions.

For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary.

The Foreign Secretary thought the US would not go ahead with a military plan unless convinced that it was a winning strategy. On this, US and UK interests converged. But on the political strategy, there could be US/UK differences. Despite US resistance, we should explore discreetly the ultimatum. Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN.

John Scarlett assessed that Saddam would allow the inspectors back in only when he thought the threat of military action was real.

The Defence Secretary said that if the Prime Minister wanted UK military involvement, he would need to decide this early. He cautioned that many in the US did not think it worth going down the ultimatum route. It would be important for the Prime Minister to set out the political context to Bush.

Conclusions:

(a) We should work on the assumption that the UK would take part in any military action. But we needed a fuller picture of US planning before we could take any firm decisions. CDS should tell the US military that we were considering a range of options.

(b) The Prime Minister would revert on the question of whether funds could be spent in preparation for this operation.

(c) CDS would send the Prime Minister full details of the proposed military campaign and possible UK contributions by the end of the week.

(d) The Foreign Secretary would send the Prime Minister the background on the UN inspectors, and discreetly work up the ultimatum to Saddam.

He would also send the Prime Minister advice on the positions of countries in the region especially Turkey, and of the key EU member states.

(e) John Scarlett would send the Prime Minister a full intelligence update.

(f) We must not ignore the legal issues: the Attorney-General would consider legal advice with FCO/MOD legal advisers.

(I have written separately to commission this follow-up work.)

MATTHEW RYCROFT
posted by gramschmidt at 11:48 AM on May 27, 2005

200!


Congratulations!



We have a winner!


posted by casu marzu at 11:49 AM on May 27, 2005

It is too late to nip this in the bud?
posted by Armitage Shanks at 11:51 AM on May 27, 2005

But 202 is a palindrome.

Ha.
posted by gramschmidt at 12:02 PM on May 27, 2005

I am not quonsar. I am a sockpuppet, however.

Can you ascertain my identity?
posted by Kwantsar at 12:09 PM on May 27, 2005

At 12:02 no less.

1+2+0+2 = 5

2+0+3 = 5

23

The Law of Fives
posted by loquacious at 12:11 PM on May 27, 2005

Goddamnit, Kwanstar. Why'd you have to get all up in my grill and throw off my numerology?
posted by loquacious at 12:12 PM on May 27, 2005

Wait. I don't understand what Heywood is insinuating. Can you explain this to me again?
posted by graventy at 12:15 PM on May 27, 2005

The spider the size of a german shepard about an illuminatus

Any horse can activate the neurogenetic circuit of a feline orgone, but it takes a real mandatory piss test to compete with an incinerated umbrella. A neophilic vagina seems to be vaporized. A ridiculously molten class action suit seems to be Californian. When the molten customer appears to be polka-dotted, an optimistic cryogenicist non-chalantly distimms the frammisgoshes with the defendant. A diskette meditates, and a FNORD toward a tornado gets stinking drunk; however, another mitochondrial globule gives secret financial aid to a World Energy Grid.
posted by gramschmidt at 12:17 PM on May 27, 2005

The former HQ of the Thames Valley Police was at Sulhamstead House in Sulhamstead, Berkshire. From 1949 to 1968, the house was owned by the Berkshire County Police and became their headquarters in 1952. Following the merge of the Berkshire County Police into the Thames Valley Police, the house took on the additional role of being the service's training college. This is also the location of the Thames Valley Police Museum.
posted by Kwantsar at 12:22 PM on May 27, 2005

posted by gramschmidt at 12:26 PM on May 27, 2005

I am not quonsar. I am a sockpuppet, however. Can you ascertain my identity?

Yes, yes I can. Do you have any other questions?
posted by jessamyn at 1:50 PM on May 27, 2005

Is s/he smaller than a breadbox?
posted by cortex at 1:54 PM on May 27, 2005

211 is prime -- the 47th prime. 47 is also prime, making 211 a primeth prime.
posted by casu marzu at 1:54 PM on May 27, 2005

Damn!
posted by casu marzu at 1:55 PM on May 27, 2005

Comment 214:

On February 14th, 1912, in Groton, Connecticut, the first diesel-powered submarine was commissioned.
posted by gramschmidt at 1:59 PM on May 27, 2005

Honuphrius is a concupiscent exservicemajor who makes
dishonest propositions to all. He is considered to have committed,
invoking droit d'oreiller, simple infidelities with Felicia, a virgin,
and to be practising for unnatural coits with Eugenius and
Jeremias, two or three philadelphians. Honophrius, Felicia, Eugenius
and Jeremias are consanguineous to the lowest degree. Anita
the wife of Honophrius, has been told by her tirewoman,
Fortissa, that Honuphrius has blasphemously confessed under
voluntary chastisement that he has instructed his slave, Mauritius, to
urge Magravius, a commercial, emulous of Honuphrius, to solicit
the chastity of Anita. Anita is informed by some illegitimate
children of Fortissa with Mauritius (the supposition is Ware's)
that Gillia, the schismatical wife of Magravius, is visited
clandestinely by Barnabas, the advocate of Honuphrius, an immoral
person who has been corrupted by Jeremias. Gillia, (a cooler
blend, D'Alton insists) ex equo with Poppea, Arancita, Clara,
Marinuzza, Indra and Iodina, has been tenderly debauched
(in Halliday's view), by Honuphrius, and Magravius knows
from spies that Anita has formerly committed double sacrilege
with Michael, vulgo Cerularius, a perpetual curate, who wishes
to seduce Eugenius. Magravius threatens to have Anita molested
by Sulla, an orthodox savage (and leader of a band of twelve
mercenaries, the Sullivani), who desires to procure Felicia for
Gregorius, Leo, Vitellius and Macdugalius, four excavators, if
she will not yield to him and also deceive Honuphrius by
rendering conjugal duty when demanded. Anita who claims to have
discovered incestuous temptations from Jeremias and Eugenius
would yield to the lewdness of Honuphrius to appease the
savagery of Sulla and the mercernariness of the twelve Sullivani,
and (as Gilbert at first suggested), to save the virginity of
Felicia for Magravius when converted by Michael after the
death of Gillia, but she fears that, by allowing his marital rights
she may cause reprehensible conduct between Eugenius and
Jeremias. Michael, who has formerly debauched Anita,
dispenses her from yielding to Honuphrius who pretends publicly to
possess his conjunct in thirtynine several manners (turpiter!
affirm ex cathedris Gerontes Cambronses) for carnal hygiene
whenever he has rendered himself impotent to consummate by
subdolence. Anita is disturbed but Michael comminates that
he will reserve her case tomorrow for the ordinary Guglielmus
even if she should practise a pious fraud during affrication
which, from experience, she knows (according to Wadding),
to be leading to nullity. Fortissa, however, is encouraged by
Gregorius, Leo, Viteilius, and Magdugalius, reunitedly, to warn
Anita by describing the strong chastisements of Honuphrius
and the depravities (turpissimas!) of Canicula, the deceased wife
of Mauritius, with Sulla, the simoniac, who is abnegand and
repents. Has he hegemony and shall she submit?
posted by languagehat at 2:01 PM on May 27, 2005

A serious (multipart) question, if I may:
What is the largest number of comments a thread has ever received (and is there a way to search that on MeFi)?
posted by birdsquared at 2:07 PM on May 27, 2005

Did you guys realize that Erwin Rommel had a lieutenant named Clausewitz, Carl Phillip Gottlieb von Clausewitz had an assistant named Rommel, and that Machiavelli lost his virginity to a crafty mule over a bale of hay at his boyhood farm?
posted by gramschmidt at 2:10 PM on May 27, 2005

We have experienced scrollage!

birdsquared: I don't know, but this is no where near it. Here is a much longer one.

Also: ? ? ? ? 11 ? 7 ? ?? ?? ? ?? ??? ?? ?? ? ? ?? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? ? , ? ? ?? ?? ?? 4 ? ? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? ? ?? ?? ?? ?? ? ? ?? ? ?? ?

Always wanted to see if that would work.
posted by casu marzu at 2:26 PM on May 27, 2005

Hmm. It worked in preview. Oh well.
posted by casu marzu at 2:27 PM on May 27, 2005

It didn't.

How does jessamyn know who I am?
posted by Kwantsar at 2:28 PM on May 27, 2005

Of all the words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these: It worked in preview.

On preview: We all know who you are.
posted by languagehat at 2:30 PM on May 27, 2005

I don't. This thread is now officially off the front MeTa page, Kwantsar, so you can go ahead and spill it for we happy few, if you so desire.
posted by gramschmidt at 2:32 PM on May 27, 2005

I conjecture the following:

Kwantsar = thedevildancedlightly = BushIsForEating = Heywood Mogroot.

That would explain everything.
posted by casu marzu at 2:36 PM on May 27, 2005

Hmm. Interesting. That would properly tie up this horrendously loose thread, wouldn't it? A little too properly.
posted by gramschmidt at 2:40 PM on May 27, 2005

Till then:


posted by gramschmidt at 2:43 PM on May 27, 2005

pass
posted by Kwantsar at 2:55 PM on May 27, 2005

Hmm. Interesting. That would properly tie up this horrendously loose thread, wouldn't it? A little too properly.

Some Imodium AD would work too.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs at 5:47 PM on May 27, 2005

so, there are now too many favorite posters for just one award...

PinkStainlessTail is now:



dhruva is now:



casu marzu is now:



thedevildancedlightly is now:


posted by shmegegge at 6:17 PM on May 27, 2005

That concludes this year's awards ceremony. I'd like to thank all the contestants and to wish them all the best of luck in next year's competition.
posted by shmegegge at 6:18 PM on May 27, 2005

One morning a visibly troubled young Indian man walks into the teepee of the elderly chief. "How may I help you?" the chief says.

Young man says, "Is it true that you give names to our people when they are born?"

"Yes my son, it was I who named almost all the members of our village."

"Tell me, oh chief, how do you choose the names?"

"Well it is simple," the chief explains. "When word is brought to me of the birth of a new person, I lift the flap of the teepee, and the first thing I see becomes the name. That is how I named your sister, Deer Drinking Water, and your brother, Eagle Soars High. But tell me, why do you ask this question, Two Dogs Fucking?"
posted by LarryC at 6:48 PM on May 27, 2005

cold-hearted, inhumane quip linked to story of death by misadventure offends resident drama queens.
posted by shmegegge at 7:48 PM on May 27, 2005

posted by gramschmidt at 10:25 PM on May 27, 2005

Fuck this noise. I just want to know why devildanced thinks seeing him and his roommate in the same room together is proof he wasn't sock-puppetting.
posted by mediareport at 11:16 PM on May 27, 2005

because then you can see where tddl's hands are.
posted by shmegegge at 12:35 AM on May 28, 2005

Fooled you shmegegge! I only posted a partial equation before. Here's the complete equation:

Kwantsar = thedevildancedlightly = BushIsForEating = Heywood Mogroot = mediareport = casu marzu.

Thanks for playing!
posted by casu marzu at 11:02 AM on May 28, 2005

*winks googly eyes*
posted by mediareport at 4:18 PM on May 28, 2005

Jesus H. God, I was just suckered into reading some of Pitchfork's Top 100 Albums of the Decade's First Half reviews:

Exactly how and why Radiohead's Kid A has come to stand as the definitive artistic statement for rock consumers born after 1975 is almost ridiculously difficult to discern. People believed (and continue to believe) in the metaphysical heft of Kid A: in its aesthetic worth, its innovation, its meaning. In 2000, Kid A felt true and inscrutable; five years later, it somehow still does: From its chilling opening organ figure to its closing silence, Kid A is enormous-- a huge, sweeping testament to Radiohead's ever-swelling worldview.

posted by gramschmidt at 6:24 PM on May 28, 2005

"ever-swelling"
posted by cortex at 8:19 PM on May 28, 2005

MetaFilthy took 16 milleseconds to find the last read comment and to check for deleted comments.

Deleted comment by MetaFilter Network

*sniff*
posted by Bdave at 8:31 PM on May 29, 2005

As of today (June 2), Heywood has not made a contribution to MetaFilter since this thread. Methinks he might have been the sock puppet. Now just to figure out which account he belonged to.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:13 AM on June 2, 2005

Hmm, this thread might be of investigative use for any future Heywood Mogroot's.
posted by gramschmidt at 8:14 AM on June 10, 2005

Hmm, thi's thread might be of inve'stigative u'se for any future He'y'woo'd Mogroot's nuculur triantula in the foilage.
posted by gramschmidt at 8:15 AM on June 10, 2005

s's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's's'
posted by gramschmidt at 8:16 AM on June 10, 2005

Fucked up apostrophe me.
posted by gramschmidt at 8:30 AM on June 10, 2005