User talk:Bookmain

Arbitration

Arbitration accepted

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be made at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming/Workshop. Fred Bauder 02:56, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected meatpuppets of Akulkis

Just so we know who we are dealing with:

It has come to my attention that Akulkis has been recruiting meatpuppets from the Mindmastery Essentialskills yahoo group. Here is the subject area of the said group:

"Amazing Power of REAL Mind Control, ancient teachings, Modern teachings scientifically researched. For YOU to GAIN ADVANTAGES & POWER in Secret, Hidden and Lost disciplines: Mind-Power, Mental Magic, Invisible Body, Miracles, Secret Prayers, Mental Atmosphere, Remote Influence, Mental Suggestion, Psychic Attack, Psychic Self-Defense, Mental Healing, Abundance, Mental Power, Psychotronic Power, Mentation, Subtle Body, Seduction, Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP), hypnosis, Self-Hypnosis, Mesmerism, Mind Control, Remote Viewing, Manifestation, Invisibility, Orgone Energy Generators, Time Lines, Brain Waves, Psychic Influence, Astral Travel, Fluidic Body, Mental Plane, Psychic Powers, Mental Influence, Zipping Protection, Energy Healing, Martial Arts, Qi Kong, Remote Viewing Past, Controlling Future, Manifesting, Dream Control, Dream Invader, Cloud Bursting, Magick, Kahuna, Huna, Secret Technologies, Pranic Energy, Psychokinetic Phenomena, Mental Radio, Voodoo, The "God" Spot, Aura Shielding, Meridians, Magnets, Psychic Mind Control, Demons, Psychic Functioning, Prophecy, Black Magick, Precognition, Dream Precognition, Time Distortion, Size Distortion, Auto-Suggestion, White Magick, Brain Training, Pendulum, Depossession, Out-of-Body, Luck, Psychic Laws, Ha Prayer Ritual, Secret Banishing, Mana Charging, Diagnostic Methods, Intuition, ESP Brain Wave Secrets, Distance Influence, Alpha Brain Wave, L-Rods, Guarding Mana, Theta Training, Secret Door to Delta, Accessing the High Self Consciously, Bio-Plasma, Bio-Energy, Psi Secrets, Suggestology, Eyeless Sight, Radionics, Supernatural, Psionics Generators, Evil Eye, Dowsing, Mind Expansion, Levitation, Life Readings, Intercepting Telepathy, Dream Secret School, Pyramid Energy, Radiesthesia, Spiritualism, Spontaneous Telepathy, Telepathic Hypnosis, Thought Power, Odic Force, Orgone Energy, Aura of Energy, Mind Clarity, Subconscious Mind hookup, and much, much more."

Here is Aaron's message to the group (dated 15th Dec):

From: Aaron Kulkis <akulkis@...> Date: Thu Dec 15, 2005 7:31 pm Subject: NLP on Wikipedia akulkis2 Offline Send Email

Morons have polluting the Wikipedia page, trying to link NLP to Dianetics and Scientology, because obviously enneagrams = engrams....(even though nobody in NLP uses the term engram, other than some fringe loser author who absolutely nobody references except for these cranks -- who, it seems, have some financial and/or professional-status motivation to slander the NLP community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Neuro-linguistic_programming#Engrams_-_enneagr\ ams

It's time to bring some people more knowledgeable than myself into this.

Plus, 10 people can pick apart the arguments of these cranks better than one.

Aaron

According to the NLP article history, Metta Bubble, DejaKitty, and Blauregen joined soon after the message was sent. There were also some anonymous IPs that also joined in the fact deletions and advocacy thereof.

I'm sure Wikipedia has nothing against someone's belief in remote influence, Kahuna sect, or Ha Prayer Rituals, and of course it is a free world mostly and one should not be banned or persecuted for remote viewing, telepathic hypnosis, or pyramid energy development as they wish. However, that background may cause a slight bias towards pseudoscientific thinking.

I will post the appropriate meatpuppet messages.

Bookmain 02:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Bookmain. I've moved your chat here. I joined before akulki ever wrote that gobbledegook. I would appreciate an apology if you ever change your mind. You could view my edit history and notice that I joined well before the date of your suspected recruitment campaign and that I contribute to a much broader section of wikipedia than most of the people editing the NLP article. I apologise for not holding the same views as you, it's perhaps a cause of some distress, but it doesn't make me a meatpuppet. Have you considered the possibility that the opinions I and others hold are actually common opinions? Perhaps it's these kind of baseless personal attacks and revert warring that is keeping more people like me from contributing to what could be a fantastic article. Best wishes and Peace. Metta Bubble 04:38, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metta Bubble, If you will not discuss this on your own discussion page, then we will discuss on the main NLP discussion page. Your appearance coincides exactly (within a few days) of Akulkis' appeal for help from more NLP fanatics. Bookmain 08:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

"recruiting to force opinion" is usually inappropriate, by any "side" or any individual.

Do you have the actual links to this forum post you're quoting, rather than just a cut/paste, to verify its contents, and any other info you may have? Thanks. FT2^(Talk) 23:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is a closed forum. Any links will come up dead, and it is against the rules of most groups anyhow. You will have to join and do a search. Or I could provide post numbers. Bookmain 08:23, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Final decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming case. Raul654 01:49, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

location

I have a number of questions regarding your editing patterns:

Firstly, what country are you located in? ---=-C-=- 04:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you located? What is your business, and what is your motivation for spending almost every day advocating the removal of scientific fact? Bookmain 03:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm located in Sydney, Australia. And wikipedia and NLP are hobbies of mine :) Are you also located in China? ---=-C-=- 05:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comaze, please tell me exactly what is your motivation for this wierd interrogation. Bookmain 06:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to ask you a few direct questions to break up the firmly entrenched positions. Would you agree to engage in dispute resolution with me? ---=-C-=- 14:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Comaze. I've scant time as it is, and I feel there are too many distractions from improvement to the NLP page already. Though I wouldn't go as far to say that sort of distraction was a form of trolling, I certainly believe the article could be far more focused towards improvement. Especially regarding cleanup. Bookmain 06:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Today you made this post:

Dilts talks of the unconscious as a precious resouce. He says that it relates to the shamanic concept of the nagual. NLP assumes that all excellent people have a strong relationship between the zonal and the nagual. These shamanic concepts could be presented in the neuro section. Bookmain 05:55, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I should clarify my bias. I don't believe NLPers are crackpots. If Dilts, Grinder and Bandler want to mix unverified neuroscience with the shamanic notions of the zonal and nagual, or with mind and spirit, that is fine by me. But some experts will want to say it is new age neurobabble or occult banality (Beyerstein and others). Bookmain 05:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The above posts brings you very close in line with a group of banned proven sockpuppets (DaveRight, JPLogan, Camridge, etc.). Are you able to explain this? I have strong evidence to prove this. ---=-C-=- 06:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am able to explain it. The arguments are written clearly in the literature, and prior users banned for being alleged sockpuppets have also used similar arguments based on the literature. However, if by your inferrence, anyone using lines from the more independent literature is a sockpuppet, then the only people left to edit the article will be the ones who do not use independent literature (bad editors). Basically, if you think I'm a sockpuppet, go ahead and prove it. As it happens, I am actually in touch with some prior alleged sockpuppets (at least, they have different email addresses), and they still helpfully offer me new research on NLP. If I am blocked or banned for being a sockpuppet (unlikely, as my office is my own) I will still be able to contribute to the article through other well meaning editors. As it is, I believe the only reason you go round accusing all non-advocates of sockpuppetry is for ulterior motives and this is in line with your persistently science-dismissing arguments and actions over the past year. Remember, you have already been told not to do this by other mediators. Your every move is being recorded. Take note! Bookmain 08:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the socks were located in one country; can you prove that you are located elsewhere? Maybe you could disclose this to a third party. ---=-C-=- 08:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Comaze. Considering the recent decision by Kate to retire after threats, I believe your address-seeking behaviour to be highly inappropriate. Do an IP check or just back off. Bookmain 09:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather communicate with you first to check with you. Based on your editing patterns, I'm almost certain that you are one of the banned editors. If not, you have openly stated that you are working with the banned editors (JPLogan, DaveRight, Camridge). Either way, I don't think its acceptable under wikipedia guidelines and policy to work with banned editors. Should we take this back to arbcom, since the mentorship seems to of all but failed. ---=-C-=- 10:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Comaze. Please explain why and how You have come to the conclusion that the mentors have all but failed. Bookmain 11:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC) I know the situation is not easy, but the discipline has led to a clearer article and vastly improved behaviour over all. Bookmain 11:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for 24 hours

You have been blocked for these edits. The reason is disruption. What you did is inexcusable. The idea is to work together and discuss things. It's not to unilaterally remove tags from the article. --Woohookitty^(meow) 06:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good correction Woohookitty. I should've waited till you sorted it yourself. My intention - balance, result - censorship of editor's views. Not acceptable. I'll add my disputes to the article as you suggested. Bookmain 08:53, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh

That's a good question. You might want to join the Wikipedia-EN mailing list. Wikipedia:Mailing_lists has the information. It's towards the bottom of the page. They often have conversations about privacy and how to protect it. Other than that, not really alot out there. It's difficult when we have people like Brandt out there who seem to like to "out" people. It's sad with kate in particular because she is one of our best (if not the best) admin. She's always extremely civil, helpful, etc. Anyway. you might want to leave a note on Jimbo's talk page as well. He's very big on privacy. Plus, he actually does respond to people. :) So you might want to try that. --Woohookitty^(meow) 09:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just some general things too. This might seem common sense, but sometimes people miss these things. If you are accessible by email, remember that others cannot see your address to you respond to them if they are using the "Email this user" link. Also, in the email you are using for Wikipedia, don't put your name in. Or don't mention where you are from. Again, this seems like minor stuff but it isn't. It took me forever to figure that out myself until I ran into someone who looked up my name, where I work, etc. It can be scary stuff. --Woohookitty^(meow) 09:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Woohookitty. I'll apply the email safety option myself. We've all been communicating through Headley behind the scenes but a well meaning but careless editor managed to pass my work email on to a "concerned" party, and I have even had a letter posted to my office making legal sounding threats. I know its all bluff and bluster, but it would be nice if editors had a clear set of international and local law recommendations for protection. At least some of these laws have real bite, and thats enough to give editors some protection, and to give them a shield to help them edit both responsibly and confidently. I'll do some more research on this and have a search of the newsgroup. We all have the option to opt out and thats a good thing, but it shouldn't be because we feel threatened and powerless. Bookmain 11:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Party on at the NLP article

Nice to see the NLPers doing what you would expect. How about encouraging them to celebrate the exit of Kate, Woohookitty? Clearly she failed (according to Comaze). My wife spent 4 hours last night looking up case and international law on privacy and protection. We both together came up with some actionable international law on privacy protection ordinance, data protection, malicious prosecution, and others. In all, it comes to over 2 large files of information. Depending on how much Jimbo is willing to kiss my arse, I may consider handing him the info. But then again, I bet he doesn't give a toss. I mean, how much was he willing to protect Kate (or any other editor) in the first place? Anyway, carry on with the partying. See how easy it will be to clarify the NLP bs now! Signing off (from Hong Kong Skeptics Office) Bookmain 10:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]