WTF (updated see comments section)

Apparently there is a moron or morons out there who have nothing better to do than try and belittle someones work. So much so they will spend a ludicrous amount of time editing and removing content from Wikipedia by force of numbers. I have no idea what their motivations are. Bury the truth? Professional jealousy? Psychotic? A horde of pranksters?

We try and avoid conspiracy theories here. We really do. If anything we try and show them for what they are. Occasionally conspiracy theories are real.  When they are then you have to speak up.
Case in point Martin Armstrong. Thrown in jail for 7 years for contempt of court for refusing to hand over his life's work. I'm not going to rehash the whole story because you can google around and find all the info you need to know to make up your mind. Just don't rely on Wikipedia to get the facts.

Since his release this year he has been very prolific in his writing and expressing his views. Most of his views are highly critical of the Bankers and their puppets (politicians).
Apparently though a group of idiots have made it their mission to have the "Economic Confidence Model" page removed from Wikipedia. Then print lies about Armstrong on his biographical page.
I thought we were past the book burning stage.
Make no mistake they are idiots. They think by having a page removed from Wikipedia will somehow make what Armstrong is saying simply go away? Make it invalid somehow? Are they so stupid that they think people don't know anyone can edit a Wiki page?

So we are down to three possible perpetrators;
1. There is a secret society of morons with way too much time on their hands
2. Govt agency with too much time on their hands
3. Bankers with too much time on their hands
A. Bury the truth B. Professional jealousy  C. Psychotic individual D. A horde of pranksters

So which seems the most likely? Well you would have to read what Armstrong is saying and what is being said on Wikipedia before you could make an informed opinion.
I'm going with either 2 or 3 for perps and A for reasons.
This economy runs on Hopium and lies in the form of wishful thinking and made up statistics.
We wouldn't want everyone to know would we?


Kid Dynamite said...

Louis -

take a step back for a second and realize that you could have written this exact same post about the motivations of people spreading massive misinformation in the silver market for the past few years...

and then you'll know exactly why I am so frustrated.

Warren James said...

[ adding links and references to article ]. The actual wikipedia article link, which appears restored.

The edits can be seen here, restored 1st August, most content specifically deleted 18th July after what appears in the notes to be a botched administrative exercise.

The user who made the edit deleted the content but redirected to Martin's main wikipedia <a href=">page</a>. Except that Martin's main page doesn't contain the same E.C.M. content, therefore the edit on 18th July can be considered dodgy or at least incomplete.

Warren James said...

Louis, I dug deeper into this. The user who did the original deletion on the 18th July has been a wikipedia content administrator for nearly 6 years. Link, which gives credence to the deletion being a mistake and we need a category #4. The forensics find is not conclusive but makes the likelihood of conspiracy less likely.

It brings to mind an entry in my quotable quotes archive, a spin on a quote from a famous French dictator:

"At some level, sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
-- Jeff Atwood

Warren James said...

... uh and just to clarify - the incompetence of which I speak is related to the user 'Causa Sui' who bungled the article edit, and not anyone else.

Louis Cypher said...

Thanks for looking into this Warren. There was an effort to have the Economic confidence model page removed. When it was removed I concluded the vandals had won. My apologies to all.

Louis Cypher said...

looks like the Economic Confidence Model has been reinstated (per MA) I haven't looked myself. Thanks again for your help on this Warren.