Epik Wikipedia battle is full-on right now

[Rob Monster]

@Intelliname has engaged the battle with the Wikipedia handlers who have been camping on a Wikipedia article about Epik that is full of nonsense narrative.

You can follow the debate here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Intelliname#April_2020

Bring popcorn but do it quick because they will probably censor this too.

Take lots of screenshots.

Here's a start:

 

[Rob Monster]

Still no response from Rob on this. So, let's give it a 3rd try....

Rob, did you want to clarify that barybadrinath's threat on your behalf is not acceptable, or did just want to keep staying silent which is basically a tacit endorsement of those actions.

Thanks,
Brad

I love @barybadrinath for his passion for justice.

I appreciate his passion and his initiative to cure an injustice.

However, that cure should be accomplished within the bounds of the law. I think my position was clear here:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1244713538586894336

As he tempers his passion with faith and self-control, I imagine that his courage and work-ethic will be magnified into something that will exceed your expectations for him.

May God bless him and direct his steps.

 

[barybadrinath]

I thank you Mr Rob Monster sir.
also to again reiterate, my comments are my responsibility solely. whatever i do or write , its from my heart. no one else is responsible. no one asked me to write as well.
I have habit to stand against injustice and this is what i have done here. When I read that wiki article written by @Molly White I had to take action.
Also to mention my comments were not threat so please stop crying for that now. I am a peaceful person and believe in principles of Nelson Mandela , Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King .

If someone will harass @Grilled and @bmugford for no reason, I will be the 1st person to stand in your support.

 

[barybadrinath]

Also I suggest @bmugford @Grilled @TCK to listen to this below. it will help u in getting peace.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Oh, yes, I spoke about this with a member of your forum via Twitter DMs about this, and suggested they pass it along. Looks like that never happened, but I'm here now so I'll copy my comments over myself:

You may wish to point out to that person on NP that the pharmaceutical claim is sourced to the Wired article (https://www.wired.com/story/how-right-wing-social-media-site-gab-got-back-online/) which is one of the stronger sources on the page

Not sourced directly to the LegitScript site

It's a similar situation to the NamePros poll, actually. We have no way of knowing if LegitScript is, well, legit, but when a news outlet like Wired covers it it gives it credence

And so it can be added

Yesterday, 9:01 PM
Or they can come to the article talk page, I'll happily point it out to them there

Yesterday, 9:02 PM
Also, where did they get that link they posted (where they wrote "Is this accurate? How come that blog entry to wikipedia wasn't scrutinized?")? That's not one of the sources cited in the Epik page

The Epik page cites Wired, which in turn links to this report: https://safemedsonline.org/wp-conte...the-Dark-Web-LegitScript-June-2018-Report.pdf

I don't know where they got their blog link, but the reason it "wasn't scrutinized" is because AFAICT it's not used at all
​

Those watching carefully will see I made an edit to the page earlier today to clarify at what point in time this criticism was made, per your suggestions in this thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.ph...iff=951739059&oldid=951592811&diffmode=source

Wow Molly, You are a rockstar! Thank you for remaining neutral, professional, and most of all, for opening up my mind with facts, and cited sources. Opposed to the other nonsense that has been festering around namePros in recent times. It's quite refreshing to know good people like yourself are helping empower wikipedia, and combat the ever growing narrative of fake news

I get that, that my comment, is just an opinion, and wikipedia likely won't label you as a rockstar, until I assume you play some rock shows, and enough media outlets / legit media outlets cover it, thus giving the rockstar title real credence, beyond a compliment for your objectivity and computer skills?

The June 2018 report you linked is certainly a thoroughly researched well written analysis for "the members of the Center for Safe Internet." I appreciate you sharing. I assume @Rob Monster was presented that, and other evidence supporting LegitScript's requests to Epik. Note to namePros, @namesilo was also mentioned in the report, and not in a very positive light, regarding to LegitScripts similar request.

There are however, possibly some inaccuracies in the reporting. Or maybe I am misinterpreting the meaning of some words, with respect.

To wit, in particular, I take issue with the use of "Registrar Sponsors"

NameSilo, LLC is an Arizona-based registrar that hosts many illicit internet pharmacies, including some purporting to sell opioids. For example, the NameSilo-sponsored website amazingpharmaceuticals.com lists opioids for sale, including fentanyl, morphine, and codeine. We were unable to verify whether products are actually shipped. LegitScript has sent multiple abuse notifications about this website and other other illicit online pharmacies NameSilo sponsors, but the company has been slow to respond, sometimes taking months to process complaints that often result in no action

I think you would agree, and I know this isn't about you, that words matter. As they can be weaponized, abusive, and/or misleading. To me, some of the language in the LegitScript report, mirrors the type of language that @Intelliname has directed towards you. Well written, piercing statements, with accuracy being secondary to manipulation, or serving a greater agenda. Just calling a spade a spade. As it would seem both LegitScript and Epik have their own agenda's, an agenda possibly being funded by people who have opposing views as to how the world works.

Namesilo is the registrar. Using the term sponsored registrar can be quite misleading. Even if I can eventually deduct the meaning. Hence, why I question if I am misinterpreting the meaning of registrar sponsored.

This full circles back to this thread in the below quote from the cited report.

For example, Epik, Inc., a registrar based in Washington state, has refused to take action in response to LegitScript’s abuse notifications without a court order. The registrar sponsors illicit online pharmacies that purport to sell a range of prescription drugs, including tramadol.

Reading the quoted bolded sentence as it is, is quite a serious direct accusation.

Because

(a) There isn't any proof that epik or namesilo directly sponsors illicit online pharmacies. -- there is proof that domains accused of such were registered at those registrars, but housing a domain, is quite different than what I think the average person would think when hearing, sponsors illicit online pharmacies that purport to sell a range of prescription drugs, including tramadol."

(b) If the evidence presented by LegitScript supported its allegations about the reported websites, then a court order would have tilted epik to acting accordingly, per the previous statement, prior to being accused of sponsoring online pharmacies.

(c) Are we basing the opening sentence in epiks wikipedia entry that epik provides services to websites that ... "those that sell illegal drugs and counterfeit medications.[8] " based on the mentioning of epik in the report described above in (a) and (b)?

Quote from: https://www.wired.com/story/how-right-wing-social-media-site-gab-got-back-online/ regarding epik / legitscript / gab.

Monster also said on Epik’s website that his company was serving as Gab’s domain registrar, but not as its hosting company. His company Epik describes itself as “the Swiss bank of domains” and is one of the few US-based registrars with a history of refusing to respond to reports of illegal activity. According to a report by the pharmaceutical watchdog organization LegitScript, Epik has been told that some of the domains the company sponsors sell illegal drugs and inauthentic medications, yet the company has not acted.

On October 29, in response to a pro-Gab thread posted by a user sporting the NPC avatar favored by the extreme right, Monster described the actions of the other internet infrastructure firms as “heavy-handed” and asked if anyone knew the best way to get in contact with the folks behind Gab. A couple of hours later, he posted again. “As near as I can tell, this does not seem to be a site overtly promoting hateful content,” he wrote.

A few hours later, Monster wrote “I was looking on their Archive site and am struggling to find this evil content,” somehow missing the unbridled racism and anti-Semitism that characterize the platform.

 

[timestamp]

sponsored = enabled
sponsors = enables

 

[Chris Hydrick]

sponsored = enabled
sponsors = enables

Do they also enable the law? By waiting for a court order? What would epik have to do to start complying, and get that line removed from wikipedia?

I imagine they have some serious repuatation cleaning up to do. Stop enabling might be a good place to start.

 

[Samer]

Do they also enable the law? By waiting for a court order? What would epik have to do to start complying, and get that line removed from wikipedia?

I imagine they have some serious repuatation cleaning up to do. Stop enabling might be a good place to start.

Where have you been?

You’re too blinded to see; Projecting your bias

 

[Chris Hydrick]

What do you think Rob’s been doing last yrs

Rob has been doing thing such as

https://www.wired.com/story/how-right-wing-social-media-site-gab-got-back-online/

which includes statements such as

Monster wrote “I was looking on their Archive site and am struggling to find this evil content,” somehow missing the unbridled racism and anti-Semitism that characterize the platform.

back to ignore.

 

[Samer]

Rob has been doing thing such as

https://www.wired.com/story/how-right-wing-social-media-site-gab-got-back-online/

which includes statements such as


back to ignore.

Same timeline as the other hit pieces.

Literally zero politics from Rob since then.

I dont even buy the original source!

 

[Samer]

Rob has been doing thing such as

https://www.wired.com/story/how-right-wing-social-media-site-gab-got-back-online/

which includes statements such as


back to ignore.

Grilled, still love u, despite the heated debate.

look everything Rob and Epik doing since then.

It reflects more views of author than Rob’s.

 

[timestamp]

Rob is using namepros and his followers to solve his problems. Not the way to do it, but it's cheap way to do it.
Couple more of these and no one will care about what he writes on here.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

Literally zero politics from Rob since then

Really?

To me, it seems like Rob spent a lot of time at Gab.

Then, after spending a lot of time at Gab,

Rob came back to nP, to spend a lot of time here.

And ever since then, it's been non stop politics on nP.

A epik VS non epik battle that you and I knowingly or unkowingly help propagate.

 

[Rob Monster]

There are at least a couple of notable firsts for NamePros worth acknowledging:

1. I am pretty sure this is the first time that #Wikipedia has been a top-ranked topic on NamePros. At the current rate, the Wikipedia topic will occupy the top 2 positions for thread popularity for the rest of the month. If you are like me, you probably assumed that Wikipedia was a pretty useful reference, and that reviews on review sites were a pretty good gauge. The trouble is when those services get weaponized. The trouble is compounded when the internal staff of the organizations themselves are not only complicit but directly responsible for censoring debate on a platform that "anyone can edit".

2. I am pretty sure this is the first time a Wikipedian has come on to NamePro as a registered user. I suspect the reason was for damage control but nevertheless, it shows that NamePros is a community of influencers. Of course I know that, and the people here know that, but now Wikipedia knows it too. For a time Wikipedia did not matter too much, but now that that the Alexa rank is back at 10K, it does again.

See here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NamePros

NamePros used to have an Alexa rank even higher than it has today:

As that Alexa rank busts through 10K on the way to 5K, the relevance of NamePros as an influencer community, grows exponentially.

NamePros's resident historian @JB Lions will likely be the one to know for sure if in fact these are both firsts. I am pretty sure yes but my history here is admittedly pretty recent!

So congratulations to the NamePros community for, once again, becoming relevant beyond the domain industry in some meaningful way.

At the end of the day, the debate about how industry leaders are portrayed matters to the industry as a whole. For this reason, I question the decision by @Mod Team Bravo to move this thread to Reviews.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

There are at least a couple of notable firsts for NamePros worth acknowledging:

1. I am pretty sure this is the first time that #Wikipedia has been a top-ranked topic on NamePros. At the current rate, the Wikipedia topic will occupy the top 2 positions for thread popularity for the rest of the month. If you are like me, you probably assumed that Wikipedia was a pretty useful reference, and that reviews on review sites were a pretty good gauge. The trouble is when those services get weaponized. The trouble is compounded when the internal staff of the organizations themselves are not only complicit but directly responsible for censoring debate on a platform that "anyone can edit".

Huh?

Fake news? Flat earther?

If it was nP news, it would be highlighted on the homepage for relevance.

What you refer to are more so black eyes of behavior namePros is not about. Or was not supposed to be about.

You must really like lemonade huh? Lot's of lemonade to be made these days. Not sure about you, but I have quite a sour taste in my mouth since all this make lemonade talk hit namePros. As, there seems to be an abundance of lemons, and a short supply of sugar these days...

How namePros home page see's popular this week:

 

[Chris Hydrick]

2. I am pretty sure this is the first time a Wikipedian has come on to NamePro as a registered user.

And you and other epik followers have showed her quite the warm welcoming huh?

Other wikipedians out there: The behavior of @Rob Monster and other epik customers/affiliates/staff/cronies do not accurately represent what namePros is supposed to be about.

 

[JB Lions]

At the end of the day, the debate about how industry leaders are portrayed matters to the industry as a whole.

Well no. I think you and Intelliname are trying to make this an industry issue, when this is your issue. This is the result of decisions you made in the past. If you look at those past threads, there were people telling you to leave it alone, you didn't. Same with the incel stuff, which you later had to drop, if I'm correct? You reached out to them, along with Gab. Basically recruiting them. It's not a Namepros issue, not a domain industry issue. It's yours.

 

[Rob Monster]

Really?

To me, it seems like Rob spent a lot of time at Gab.

Then, after spending a lot of time at Gab,

Rob came back to nP, to spend a lot of time here.

And ever since then, it's been non stop politics on nP.

A epik VS non epik battle that you and I knowingly or unknowingly help propagate.

I spent time on Gab only long enough to make sure that my decision to rescue them would not end up a fiasco. If you look at my opening post there, it set the tone which was one of responsible self-policing to make sure that folks engaging in misanthropy would not feel welcome.

If I felt like Gab management was not up to the task, I would have done the same thing with Gab as we did with 8Chan when they showed up. I covered that at length here. For the free speech hardliners, that was a wakeup call.

By comparison, NamePros is much more of a community than Gab. In case you are wondering, I have not spoken to Gab's CEO in over a year. They are on their own. We are their registrar and host. They have helped us to refine our end to end solutions for hosting resiliency.

As for the direction of NamePros, the traffic has certainly grown I would not say there is much politics, unless you mean folks who try to convince Mods to move Epik-related threads so that they are not so visible.

However, to your question, while there are plenty of lovely people at Gab, they are not really my "tribe". I have met plenty of impressive people that for one reason or another were shunned by Facebook and/or Twitter and had simply grown tired of self-censorship. That does not make them all "Nazis".

For example, right now, the #1 trending topic on Twitter is the #RedHeadedWoman:

That topic did not even exist this morning until when Twitter decided to make it a trending topic. This is classic propaganda in the digital age that would make Edward Bernays and Tavistock blush.

Now add a bit of AI to hyper-target tribes and you create the ability to endlessly rub people up against each other until everyone hates everyone. My advice? Don't fall for it. You're being played.

 

[Rob Monster]

Well no. I think you and Intelliname are trying to make this an industry issue, when this is your issue. This is the result of decisions you made in the past. If you look at those past threads, there were people telling you to leave it alone, you didn't. Same with the incel stuff, which you later had to drop, if I'm correct? You reached out to them, along with Gab. Basically recruiting them. It's not a Namepros issue, not a domain industry issue. It's yours.

I am going to disagree with you for the simple reason that if registrars like Godaddy can render domains as toxic goods, or Wikipedia can tar and feather anyone who serves as their registrar, we have a problem.

We never recruited Incels.me. They were with us for a time. They now operate with Incels.Co, which is on Epik. As far as I know, they behave themselves. The owner and founder is a mild-mannered black man.

 

[Rob Monster]

And you and other epik followers have showed her quite the warm welcoming huh?

Other wikipedians out there: The behavior of @Rob Monster and other epik customers/affiliates/staff/cronies do not accurately represent what namePros is supposed to be about.

I mean Wikipedia no harm, and have said as much. They are harming Epik and allowing a reasonable and lawful position on acceptable use of domains as defining our entire identity in a way that is designed to create harm to person and property. It is malfeasance and either is cured soon, or will be pursued in court.

 

[JB Lions]

I am going to disagree with you for the simple reason that if registrars like Godaddy can render domains as toxic goods, or Wikipedia can tar and feather anyone who serves as their registrar, we have a problem.

We never recruited Incels.me. They were with us for a time. They now operate with Incels.Co, which is on Epik. As far as I know, they behave themselves. The owner and founder is a mild-mannered black man.

In the Incels.me thread, you literally said they are welcome at Epik, I'm sure they were reading that thread -

They are welcome at Epik. To be clear, just as I was not a Gab user, I am also not an advocate for the MGTOW lifestyle.

https://www.namepros.com/threads/in...gistry-over-hate-speech.1108366/#post-6966526

Then Joseph mentioned you dropping some site, what he was describing sounded exactly like that incel stuff.

 

[Chris Hydrick]

They are harming Epik

How?

By not allowing the article to be edited to include epik as the winner of a controversial unoffical poll?

By wikipedia citing articles that speak to you stepping up to house gab as a registrant of epik?

Rules are rules. Be it nP rules. Wikipedia rules. ICANN Rules. Epik ToS. US Law. Germany Law. Why not respect and act accordingly?

We've talked about this. Taking accountability goes a long way.

 

[HotKey]

And speaking of tribes, where do our allegiances lie? We are so quick to forsake those whom dedicate and commit time and time again, for an unknown?

The unknown, whom is blaspheming one our our members and the company founded, joins our forum, commits for a day, and is gone. Poof. Is this where our allegiance lies?

We ask rhetorical questions, knowing full well the answers. Calling out, searching for weakness in that which strengthens us. And yet, we come home every day, here back to NP, because it's where our heart is.

What up, dudes??

 

[bmugford]

It is malfeasance and either is cured soon, or will be pursued in court.

Cool, good luck with that. Again, truth is an absolute defense for any libel or defamation claim.
If you don't like the way something is framed, but it is factually true, then too bad.

I would be very surprised if an actual court is going to entertain any of your conspiracy theory nonsense either.

The internet remembers. You will just have to live with your decisions and the connections you made and trumpeted. That is not going to disappear, as is much of the conspiracy stuff you have said on NamePros and other venues.

That Huffington Post article is way more damaging than anything on Wikipedia. It is the second result when someone searches your name. Why don't you go after them?

Brad

 

[barybadrinath]

Wikipedia rules were visible when mollywhite started blocking anyone and everyone who was writing " support to change " in wiki's epik article.
First you try to silent free voices and then you yourself go and hide behind "freedom of speech"

 

[Rob Monster]

Cool, good luck with that. Again, truth is an absolute defense for any libel or defamation claim.
If you don't like the way something is framed, but it is factually true, then too bad.

I would be very surprised if an actual court is going to entertain any of your conspiracy theory nonsense either.

The internet remembers. You will just have to live with your decisions and the connections you made and trumpeted. That is not going to disappear, as is much of the conspiracy stuff you have said on NamePros and other venues.

That Huffington Post article is way more damaging that anything on Wikipedia. It is the second result when someone searches your name. Why don't you go after them?

Brad

If there is a systematic agenda to defame, deplatform, demonetize, or unperson, there will need to be just one court that does not dismiss in summary judgment and allow discovery motions to go forward. Based on counsel's advice to date, I am reasonably confident that such a judge exists in a jurisdiction that will have standing sufficient to begin a discovery process large enough to matter. We shall see. Although I am not normally litigious, as with the BC30 case, when rational minds fall short, we'll engage counsel in a resource-efficient way in order to seek justice and clear our name, especially if it fulfills a higher purpose.