Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Libertas/Evidence

message: moved from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration by sannse:
**I would welcome someone explaining how I respond to the falsehoods of Radicalsubversiv's claims when I am not Libertas. This process is farcical and contemptible. Ollieplatt 21:24, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Evidence is welcome from anyone, including on issues of identity.  Please add to the evidence page.  But take care to edit only in a separate section from other users - it is important that you do not edit evidence presented by others. -- sannse (talk) 22:47, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Riddle me this, this is an arbitration page on Libertas. I am not Libertas. Reading Rhobite/Radical's commentary, they are commenting mainly on me. I wish to respond to those charges but in so doing am acknowledging a claim which is just false. It is ridiculous. If Libertas has behaved incorrectly, then Libertas should be held to account. I would appreciate having my own page for my response, until then I'm not going to participate in this unjust farce which delivers verdicts before evidence. Radicalsubversiv and his sockpuppets has a radical left-wing POV agenda, which I was perfectly willing to demonstrate and did so. Ollieplatt 01:33, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: Before bothering to provide any evidence, I ask the following questions:
* Will the misconduct and impropriety of Radicalsubversiv and his sockpuppets Rhobite be considered in this case?
* Will Arbitration Committee members (David Gerard) and (Ambi) who decided to reject my arbitration request PRIOR to it being completed be participating in the decision-making?
* Will there be a separate page to consider claims made against me as distinct from Libertas (who is not me)? If not, how does this Star Chamber propose that I disprove that I am another user? 
* Will Arbitration Committee members with known left-wing POV editing styles be participating in the decision-making?
* Will those submitting evidence, asserting a different perspective, themselves be examined for sockpuppetry of radicalsubversiv and other left-wing POV pushers?
* Does the fact that Radicalsubversiv is in fact motivated by a false belief that I produced a weblog about Michael Sherrards effect these proceedings and by what process can this committee adjudicate on web-logs produced outside Wikipedia. I believe Sherrards produced this web-log to cast me in a negative light prior to initiating this action. I post the link here so that committee members can see what is behind this claim.
* Will the misconduct of Rhobite (Radical's sockpuppet) be examined specifically as it relates to his serial abuse of administrator's duties to protect POV in articles.
I require answers to these questions from the Arbitration Commiteee in whole, or someone speaking on its behalf. Ollieplatt 01:57, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Arbitration Commitee Corruption and Related Issues

message: See the following from Rhobite(Radical's sockpuppet)'s user page. I'm glad I'm not the only confused one. Ollieplatt 02:03, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it really necessary for you to copy and paste random bits of my talk page into the evidence page? Rhobite 02:45, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)
Yes. Ollieplatt 03:57, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: A Confusing Process Even Among Experienced Users

message: That is a heinious thing to do. You don't cut & slice comments from Rhobite's user talk page & then place them out of context regarding "intimidating new users." You know very well that refers back to a comment that I made when someone vandalized me while I was attempting to report a vandalism in progress and I thanked Rhobite for being so quick to revert before I could even report it. I noticed that you didn't clarify with my follow-up regarding suspicious comments by  anexperienced Wikipedian regarding that something was afoot, Dr. Watson. Shame on you. Newbie but not a dupe. Watch your step. --allie 03:59, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: More evidence of Rhobite/Radicalsubversiv acting in concert and intimidating new users

message: RadicalSubversiv didn't mention this in his statement. You know that I am a (gasp) newbie. There was a comment on 12 Jan by User:Schissel regarding "Further rv of an entry that no longer exists. Odd," I have no idea what that means; I just try to edit that page so it doesn't sound like a rap sheet & maintain some clarity. Please review for yourself to see if it is relevant. Best Regards from the (gasp) newbie, --allie 02:01, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Hillary Rodham Clinton

message: I have noticed that User:Nutrosnutros appears in both sections of James Day's evidence. Thryduulf 08:35, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: unless JD tells us what his methodology was (and I wouldn't give out security info like that), we can't really tell what that means. Blair P. Houghton 18:41, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: User:Nutrosnutros

message: Threatening email = smoking gun.
Blair P. Houghton 04:59, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recommend total ban on all IP's ever used by Ollieplatt or his suspected sock puppets.