> Let the Chips fall where they may

Herschelkrustofsky

The Chip Berlet article is currently protected, due to an edit war over this edit:

QUOTE

"Berlet is professional political hit man whose specialty is smearing anyone outside the traditional left-right categories as an extremist, at best, and a nascent Nazi at worst." -Justin Raimondo

This was immediately reverted by Berlet's faithful companion, Will Beback, but then a whole new cast of characters arrived on the scene, including Merovingian, who ran for ArbCom a few years back. I assumed that he was some Armenian guy, until I learned, to my disappointment, that the name comes from a character in "The Matrix."

Rootology

Wonder what will happen to Chip's article when people actually do proper homework, and build up legitimate criticisms with acceptable sourcing? Will he flip out and go nuts when he and his friends can't Wikilawyer their way to beautifying his article anymore?

It's the blimp, Frank

QUOTE(Rootology @ Sat 22nd December 2007, 4:36pm)

Will he flip out and go nuts when he and his friends can't Wikilawyer their way to beautifying his article anymore?

He's already there -- see his cries of indignation.

Yehudi

QUOTE(Rootology @ Sat 22nd December 2007, 4:36pm)

Wonder what will happen to Chip's article when people actually do proper homework, and build up legitimate criticisms with acceptable sourcing? Will he flip out and go nuts when he and his friends can't Wikilawyer their way to beautifying his article anymore?

Someone will just change WP:RS to say that any source hostile to Berlet is a hate site hence cannot be reliable.

It's the blimp, Frank

QUOTE

My entry suffers from being used as a toilet by my political critics. I am tired of it. I do not object to negative material being in the entry...I object to the page being unbalanced and constantly under attack by editors seeking to settle political scores or punish me as a Wiki editor for disagreements arising from editing discussions on other pages. Please do not reward Terrawatt for pissing on my page.(Chip Berlet, on the talk page of "his" article)

Moulton

QUOTE(Chip Berlet's Complaint About His Wikipedia Bio Page)

My entry suffers from being used as a toilet by my political critics. I am tired of it. I do not object to negative material being in the entry...I object to the page being unbalanced and constantly under attack by editors seeking to settle political scores or punish me as a Wiki editor for disagreements arising from editing discussions on other pages. Please do not reward Terrawatt for pissing on my page.(Chip Berlet, on the talk page of "his" article)

Chip's complaint extends to many biographical entries, most of which are biographies of subjects who are not also Wikipedians. I have seen several biographies used as "coatracks" [WP:COAT] to promote tangential partisan political agendas which have little or nothing to do with the life and work of the subject of the biography.

Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 27th December 2007, 1:59am)

QUOTE(Chip Berlet's Complaint About His Wikipedia Bio Page)

My entry suffers from being used as a toilet by my political critics. I am tired of it. I do not object to negative material being in the entry...I object to the page being unbalanced and constantly under attack by editors seeking to settle political scores or punish me as a Wiki editor for disagreements arising from editing discussions on other pages. Please do not reward Terrawatt for pissing on my page.(Chip Berlet, on the talk page of "his" article)

Chip's complaint extends to many biographical entries, most of which are biographies of subjects who are not also Wikipedians. I have seen several biographies used as "coatracks" [WP:COAT] to promote tangential partisan political agendas which have little or nothing to do with the life and work of the subject of the biography.

Chip's complaint would seem to extend especially to biographical articles where he is the main offender. Promoting tangential partisan political agendas is his stock in trade.

Herschelkrustofsky

Here's some charming repartee from the talk page. As our scene opens, the Chipster is arguing that everyone who has challenged him on the talk page is a long-term arch-enemy of his, and is only participating in the discussion in order to persecute him (he is maneuvering here to invoke Nobs01 and others.) He has just accused Leatherstocking of being a "LaRouche editor"/sockpuppet, and Leatherstocking has just demonstrated that he has never edited any article that is in any way related to LaRouche. Andyvphil is right-winger of the David Horowitz persuasion, but he gets in some good lines:

QUOTE

Cberlet, laying aside the question of whether the abusive admin, SlimVirgin, or her crewe were involved in unjustified blockings, none of the individuals you name seem to be involved in this dispute. Exactly whom are you accusing of being a sockpuppet? Andyvphil (talk) 23:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Sort of a: "when did you stop beating your fife?" Not very well constructed, however. Maybe a C+ in veiled personal attacks, but B- for extra effort...shows room for improvement. --Cberlet (talk) 00:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

No, it was "Exactly whom are you accusing of being a sockpuppet?" You get an "F" for plausibilility of pretended incomprehension, btw. Andyvphil (talk) 01:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL! "Make my day?" Is this part of the cliche contest? Dtobias and I are using movie cliches. Join in the fun! --Cberlet (talk) 01:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Does pretended silliness usually work for you when you are caught out? Andyvphil (talk) 01:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

This is boring. You plop a huge pile of nasty and falacious material crafted by the right-wing Horowitz and his POV spawn on the discussion page and now you want to have a converstaion? Deal or no deal? I never slandered Horowitz...I don't have to, he does a much better job on his own. You pretend there is no history of animosity when that is patently false. Move on. I am not going to stoop to your level of personal attacks. If you don't have a sense of humor, then we should return to editing text. At the very least, however, you owe an apology to SlimVirgin for the vicious and false personal attack. That is common courtesy. --Cberlet (talk) 02:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

First you went silly, and now you're bored. The one thing that doesn't stop is the flow of untruth. Exactly where has the "huge pile of nasty and falacious material crafted by the right-wing Horowitz and his POV spawn" that I "plopped" on the discussion page gone? I don't see it anywhere. And, no, I'm not particularly interested in having a conversation with you. You clearly implied that someone opposing you on the Raimondo issue was a new LaRouche sock puppet. This is not a conversation. You are being grilled. You are evading the question: "Exactly whom are you accusing of being a sockpuppet?" Andyvphil (talk) 09:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Herschelkrustofsky

There's a intriguing new section, called "Wikipedia Needs Process To Handle Private Intelligence Interagency Conflicts." Terrawatt makes an eminently reasonable suggestion, at which point Cberlet has a conniption, and then Dan T. makes his debut on the Talk:Cberlet page, reading Chip the riot act. Finally, El C., one of Chip's bodyguards, nervously intervenes, hoping for damage control.

FLIPSIDE

I am responsible for the intriguing new section. I am glad that Chip was sufficiently intrigued, disturbed and trolled into being his true self by it. I trolled enough of a response to capture his minimum participation in the setup for the burner article I wrote on him:

http://www.contextflexed.com/storychipberlet.html

So, it was a worthwhile taunt. Sorry I didn't name any illustrious other names who may have wanted credit for bellysticking for me. I don't personally know (yet) any of the other participants aside from their pages, and was adhering to what passes for etiquette.

It's the blimp, Frank

QUOTE(FLIPSIDE @ Sat 9th February 2008, 2:44pm)

http://www.contextflexed.com/storychipberlet.html

By casting him as a pinko, you're just validating his cover story.

FLIPSIDE

I know that Webster Tarpley and the 9/11 Truth guys posit that Berlet is a deep cover fake and false flag operative. In my opinion Berlet can be made to suffer and suffocate under his "fake" pinkoness. I don't put much stock in the 9/11 Truth movement, rating them with Raelians and such.

Nevertheless, my jestful hostility at Berlet is genuine. Nothing I do to him is going to help him in any way. I will see to it that he is incessantly harmed by my commentary until he relents or offers me a buyoff. I feel this way even about nonprivate gubmint agents posing as pinkos, i.e. get out of the way and let real citizens deal with real pinkos. For example A.N.S.W.E.R. If A.N.S.W.E.R. is providing pinkospace just to infiltrate the pinkos, then they are going to suffer the same outings and shove-asides as the real ones, unless they identify and share treats.