sotnd conservaleaks

2010-04-16 ZB2 EmersonWhitecp banning - why I did it
2010-04-16 ZB2 Is the threat of attacks on Conservapedia related to increased traffic lately or to Conservapedia Anti-Abortion Project or both or likely neither?
2010-04-16 FF {cp-fab-five:1011} "Lorddragyn", FYI
2010-04-17 FF {cp-fab-five:1016} New stamp
2010-04-17 ZB2 Wikipedia article on conservapedia, won some battles but lost the war

{cp-fab-five:1011} "Lorddragyn", FYI

"TK" <tfk92...@hotmail.com>, Fri, 16 Apr 2010 03:44:41 -0700:

http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/User:CodyH  Douglas blocked this user, same
name on CP, yesterday.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/CodyH  because he posted
on CP about creating the same article on both wiki's as an experiment, and
lauded the Rat's for how they handled their suspicions' versus DouglasA's
actions in deleting his article and blocking him.  Of course he didn't want
to mention that RW has never been under constant attack and tricks like
CP...

Note his location and profession.  Also look on his talk page at RW.  About
his not yet ready to out a sock of his, and his whole spiel about CP.

Now look at CP user Lorddragyn
<http://www.conservapedia.com/User:Lorddragyn> .  Check user shows him
editing from Florida, and his emails to me asking to be unblocked have this
return address:

From: Willey, Stephen P SSgt USAF AFSOC 1 SOEMS/MXMFN
[mailto:Stephen.Wil...@hurlburt.af.mil]

Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 7:24 PM

To: tfk92...@hotmail.com

Subject: RE: banning

This is Hurlburt Field, USAF:
http://benefits.military.com/misc/installations/Base_Content.jsp?id=985

This Lorddragyn is CodyH's sock...and he added Charlton Heston to Hollywood
Values, etc.

I have blocked him and reverted most all of his edits.

--TK

Karajou <kara...@gmail.com>, Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:15:16 -0500:

You know what...

I think I'll pen a letter to the base commanding officer about this "fine"
young man.

Karajou <kara...@gmail.com>, Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:47:37 -0500:

A copy of my letter to Commanding Officer, Hurlburt Field USAF; it includes
links to bolster what I said and make it serious that we cannot have a
member of the Armed Forces running about doing illegal things:

*To Hurlburt Field Commanding Officer,

I am a retired Navy man, and I am a senior adminstrator to a website called
Conservapedia; this website is much like Wikipedia in content, with the
difference being that we want it clean enough for a family environment.
Like Wikipedia, we also get our share of "petty vandalism", i.e. someone
comes in and adds swear words, links to pornographic sites, etc.  But we
also have a problem as well with several other users who are part of a
website called "RationalWiki"; these users have every intention of causing
cyber-harassment and cyber-terrorism in an effort to shut us down, both of
which are illegal according to Federal law.

This brings me to one of your Airmen.  Willey, Stephen P SSgt USAF AFSOC 1
SOEMS/MXMFN has been identified as user "Lorddragyn" in Conservapedia, and
he has been posting false content prior to his removal yesterday; he was
previously identified and banned as user "WesleyS", and he has been
identified as user "CodyH" in RationalWiki.  We picked up his actual address
when he logged in using a government-owned computer system.  Whether or not
he has done anything illegal is anyone's guess, but I'm neither going to
take any chances regarding my site nor will I tolerate his presence in my
site while he's an active member at a proven cyber-vandal site.

I want a direct order placed on SSgt Willey.  He is not to participate in
RationalWiki while he is a member of the United States Air Force; he not to
participate in any online forum of any kind while in uniform; he not to
participate in any online forum while using a government-owned computer
system.

Brian Macdonald
United States Navy, Retired
Murfreesboro, Tennessee

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/19/nation/na-schlafly19
http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/User:CodyH
http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Essay:Rational_Response  Letter to Stephanie
Simon of the Los Angeles Times, boasting of "cyber-terror tactics" from
another RW user.*

Karajou <kara...@gmail.com>, Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:57:37 -0500:

You know what?

Getting the Air Force involved may force this issue we have with RW into a
court room.  At worse-case with SSgt Willey, he may face an Article 15
hearing (non-judicial punishment) at minimum, or special court-marshal at
maximum, which could mean his punishment would be not more than one year of
confinement, reduction of rank to lowest rank, forfeiture of all pay, and a
bad conduct discharge.  The Art. 15 would mean he is kept in the USAF, but
he gets no more than 45 days restriction, reduction in rank, and no more
than a month's pay taken as a fine.

But the important message to RW would mean that if one of their members gets
punished for it, then all of them would be.

Geoffrey Plourde <geo.p...@yahoo.com>, Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:01:42 -0700 (PDT):

It's unlikely he'll be dinged, and if he is, it will probably be for using a government computer system for personal use. A reprimand and no-go order seems more likely if the CO decides to act.

Karajou <kara...@gmail.com>, Sat, 17 Apr 2010 23:00:00 -0500:

I have to disagree with you on this one.  I know how the military operates;
everyone in the military does not depart from the military when the day's
work is over with.  If some private causes a problem at a nightclub
somewhere off base, his bosses will be reading him the riot act the
following morning, and that's just for starters.  I have personally
witnessed multiple Captain's Masts onboard two of my ships in which sailors
were punished for such things as being late on paying civilian crediting
agencies, had problems with the police, had unpaid parking tickets, and
other minor infractions.  Now, what is the difference between that and some
USAF clown who chooses to behave improperly online?  His C.O. is well aware
of the cyber-bullying incidents that made national headlines, and now he's
aware of RW, and RW's behavior regarding internet crimes.

This C.O. is just not going to risk it.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:01 PM, Geoffrey Plourde <geo.p...@yahoo.com>wrote:

2010-04-16 ZB2 EmersonWhitecp banning - why I did it
2010-04-16 ZB2 Is the threat of attacks on Conservapedia related to increased traffic lately or to Conservapedia Anti-Abortion Project or both or likely neither?
2010-04-16 FF {cp-fab-five:1011} "Lorddragyn", FYI
2010-04-17 FF {cp-fab-five:1016} New stamp
2010-04-17 ZB2 Wikipedia article on conservapedia, won some battles but lost the war

Last updated 12 Apr 2011 by Georg Kraml.