Monday, April 05, 2010

More Wiki Wars (YFZ Ranch Skirmish)

I admit, it's sorta fun, in that I am learning a few things about "Wikipedia" that I may be able to use in the future.
The not so fun stuff is the bias I am running into in writing the page. The fun stuff? I'm getting a school of hard knocks education in Wikipedia. Something I may be able to use at a future date.

This is how the Wikipedia page on YFZ Court rulings now reads:
"On February 10, 2010, Arizona prosecutor Matt Smith agreed not to use any evidence seized from the YFZ raid at the upcoming trial of Warren Jeffs. Jeffs is awaiting trial in Arizona on four counts of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor, charges filed in 2007."
This is a modification of my short lived experiment to successfully contribute to Wikipedia. The original addendum to the section on "Court Rulings," read as follows:
"On February 5, 2010, all evidence seized during the YFZ raid was ruled inadmissible in cases involving Warren Jeffs in Arizona. The prosecution was barred from using that evidence either directly or indirectly."
This, I might add, is scrupulously accurate, albeit brief. The current entry is a modification of mine. It is inaccurate as to date, and misleading. It implies Matt Smith only "agreed" not to use evidence from YFZ, but what he agreed to was a motion that was a motion to suppress brought by the defense. Since an evidence suppression hearing is like a trial of the evidence (something Judge Conn mentioned), the roles of defense and prosecution are reversed to some degree and the evidence goes on trial, with the defense prosecuting the evidence.

Under these circumstances when Matt Smith (defending the evidence) agrees with Michael Piccarreta (prosecuting the evidence), he is pleading the evidence guilty. The evidence is then "put to death" and cannot live again, in court. This is known as Evidence Suppression. Matt pled his client guilty. The evidence is suppressed.

At any rate, I figured I had done it wrong somehow, and I tried again, with this entry:
"On February 4, 2010, Arizona prosecutor Matt Smith signed a stipulation of the defense that 1.) That defendant's motion to suppress evidence (from YFZ be) granted, 2.)That evidence obtained thereby (be) suppressed (and) 3.) That the raid was 'unlawful.'[52] Judge Steven F. Conn accepted that agreement the following day[53] stating that September 3rd, 2008 motion to suppress be granted[54]. None of the evidence may be used 'directly or indirectly' in Arizona. Jeffs is awaiting trial in Arizona on four counts of being an accomplice to sexual conduct with a minor, charges filed in 2007."
The entry is now more detailed, and was now linked directly to the Mohave County Arizona court site, to each specific order or document, and quoted directly from those orders and motions.

I figured that Wikipedia's policies required more specificity on controversial topics, and while struggling with the formatting, I pretty much got it right. The formatting, that is.

It was almost immediately changed back to the way it reads now, and as if for spite, an additional "grind your heal into the neck" entry was made about Merril Leroy Jessop's conviction:
"On March 19,2010, Merril Leroy Jessop was sentenced to 75 years in prison for one count of sexual assault of a child. Jessop was convicted of illegally marrying and then fathering a child with a 15 year old female."
The culprit? "RonLawHouston"

In essence then, the page is being written by FLDS haters. The entries are superficially "neutral" but if even a factual edit is made that deviates from the narrative that is desired by the haters, someone swoops in, and changes the page back to the "less favorable to the FLDS" version. In this case, a version that is a lie in favor of a copiously researched and referenced version that just so happens to favor the FLDS case.

Sphere: Related Content


jay c said...

Does Wikipedia have some kind of appeal process to sort out these kinds of "disagreements"?

The Pharisee said...

I'm trying to figure that out. I once watched such a war among theological proponents of differing "preterist" views. It was UGLY, they kept changing the page and shouting at each other on the internet.

Ron in Houston said...

I'm going to try to be civil. I didn't change your edit. Perhaps before you make any more fallacious accusations you should try to actually understand how Wikipedia works.

Now having said that, if you do try to assert that the raid was "illegal" I will change it.

That's not a fact and never has been.

The Pharisee said...

I won't be you faceless troll, the Wikipedia edit page says you did. You have ZERO credibility. You masquerade as a lawyer and you are not. You say you'll "try to be civil" and you drip vitriol at other times.

You're a fake. You CANNOT be relied on to tell the truth. Are you really so empty that you have to juice numbers at a blog to feel like you're somebody? Who could trust such a troll?

TxBluesMan said...

Not that you'll admit it, but the evidence shows that Ron is correct and you are incorrect. I posted the evidence on my blog.

The Pharisee said...

I'm sure everyone at the Houston Public Library will read it too.

Ron in Houston said...

How can I not drip vitrol at a lying sack like you.

The record is there all at Wikipedia that you're wrong and I told the truth.

Secondly, as I said, I didn't "juice" any numbers. Call the Houston Public library, call Alexa or whoever. The numbers reflect actual readers at FLDS Texas. There is no mythical machine out there juicing the numbers. Besides, if I wanted to "juice" any numbers why wouldn't I do it on FLDS Legal which is MY site.

As to my motivation behind doing it, part of it was to see what drove Alexa rankings and part of it was to show you what a pathetic loser you are.

The Pharisee said...

Ron, there's no "upstream" to your site visits and virtually none of the viewers came as a result of a "referral" or search.

Are you telling me they all woke up one morning Last month with a Vision that said GO TO "," and like lemmings, they did?

Go on, keep lying. Or the reader can go to Alexa, and check, and see that you have no upstream and all your downstream is google and no one searched to find your site.

Any site with a breathtaking statistical rise in rank, and a plummeting descent in people "googling" it to find it, is being "juiced." Sites don't juice themselves. Site owners and site fans do that.

No one looked for you, but they all found you in record numbers.

Are you denying that you post from the Houston Public Library or use it's system in some way?

Ron in Houston said...

Gee Hugh -

Has it every dawned on you that a number of sites don't have "downstreams" or "upstreams."

I don't "downstream" or "upstream" your site. It pops up when I start typing since I've been here before. Similarly when I'm done with this comment, I won't go anywhere else from your site. The only time I'd every go somewhere else is if you posted a link I happened to follow.

There is a reason for the meteoric rise of FLDS Texas but you're such a moron that you'll never figure it out. You'll go off on your wild conspiracy theories like me turning every computer terminal in the Houston Public library into a Zombie or other such ignorant and unlikely theories. I'd tell you but it's just too much fun to watch you make an ass of yourself.

And yes, the City of Houston has free wifi downtown. When I can get a signal, I'll sometimes use it.

The Pharisee said...

You're still admitting to doping the numbers.

So, I'm brain dead and cooked up a wild conspiracy theory as to how you did it, you keep admitting that you did it, and you admit you're using the HPL.

The IP in question, was static. I even know where it is.

You're a site fluffer.

Ron in Houston said...

No Hugh

Once again you're flopping around like a fish out of water.

I said there was a reason and you immediatly jumped to "doping."

No, Hugh, I haven't been to the HPL in a number of years. The City of Houston has free wifi in certain areas downtown. Again, watching you thrash about is certainly amusing.

The reason for the rise is legit and it's actually pretty damn simple but I'll let you keep up with your wild theories.

The Pharisee said...


I really don't care. You keep hiding behind semantics. So, I have it all wrong about the HPL OR...

You haven't been there...(still not a denial).

I'm sure all the hits are legitimate "hits" but that's not the same as legitimate interest. The tale of the tape is there to see, and the statistics are inescapable.

Your hits are overwhelmingly the same KIND of hit. That's not sufficiently random to document spontaneous or "Grass Roots" visitation patterns.

I'm sure Alexa is missing some type of hits, but statistically the numbers are so small as to not matter.

The facts are these:

Whoever fired up their browser, came overwhelmingly and DIRECTLY without going anywhere else first, to FLDS Texas. They started doing so in the rough time frame of the middle of March. People DON'T do that en mass when the news cycle is down.

Next, they departed in overwhelmingly large numbers, directly to Google. While not absolute proof, that is what someone does when they get onto a public computer and fire up a browser whose homepage is set to a particular site.

Your "HITS" are indeed a large number, so large that other behaviors of random visitors were OBLITERATED statistically. What's left if that the number of people coming as a result of search behavior is so low, as to approach zero, and Alexa states that. The number of people who departed your site went in such large numbers to "Google," that Alexa rounds it up to 100% instead of listing 99.99993%.

You're CAUGHT.

Your site viewers sign on, see the site, and say: "Oh, that's not where I want to be, I'll go to Google..."

IN ONE MONTH you blasted past me for overall world wide rankings starting from the internet boondocks, and zipped past Brother Burge over at Iowahawk for US Popularity. Except Dave Burge has 1125 (Little Green Footballs, Power Line, Pajamas Media, Hotair, Protein Wisdom, Michelle Malkin, Hugh Hewitt, etc.) sites linking in and you only have a total of 24, 1101 less than Iowahawk (a popular political humor blog), and all you do is kvetch about the FLDS, AND ME. You're saying that I am in part, such an attractive topic to blog about, that people would read about you, at a site with less inbound links, to know about me, at a site with MORE inbound links that IS ABOUT ME and AUTHORED by me.

My Dad used to say when confronted with stories like that, one word.


It's Fluffing, it's Astroturfing, that's all it is.

You are caught RED HANDED trying to puff yourself up like Aesop's frog. It really doesn't matter if I surmised you shot Mr. Mustard in the Conservatory, if you clubbed him with a pipe in the Library. The result is still the same, and the act is merely a question of style.

Ron in Houston said...

Well you are at least 1/2 correct. This IP which is the downtown Houston Free wi-fi comes back as a static IP for the Houston public library.

However, I'm in the courthouse which is a good 10 blocks from the library.

So only my little laptop - no Zombie library computers in sight.

The Pharisee said...

Then I'm close enough for Government Work Ron.

I'm dealing with liars. Getting part of it right, is close enough, that's what probable cause is all about. I only have to have a valid partially correct working theory.

You guys and gals don't tell the truth except when it serves you, and you are anonymous. Saying I saw a four hole steamer on a torpedo run in the heat of battle that later turns out to be a three, hardly a big deal.

Your people have fluffed your site. You know it, I know it. I have a pretty good idea how you did it that might turn out to be true, supported by hard evidence through a third party site that HPL was involved.

The rest is just detail.

You want to "win" so badly, that you've doctored your card to pick up strokes. The problem is, you should do that more carefully next time, it's more believable. Going from "shankapotomus" to setting course records every time you go to the Torrey Pines clubhouse, it's a bit suspicious.