3 ms·
>>> making tens of thousands of edits and logging thousands of actions, to implode the whole thing over a pointless argument Sounds to me like deep cover. Per
by sandworm101 3y ago
>>> making tens of thousands of edits and logging thousands of actions, to implode the whole thing over a pointless argument
Sounds to me like deep cover. Perhaps this wasn't one person. Perhaps this was a project run by a team over many years. All those tiny edits? The ability to spin up so many accounts without being detected? Getting privileges to those new accounts? These are the techniques of professionals. Perhaps this was a state actor. Perhaps an advertising agency. Any number of organizations might want to have a high-level wikipedia editor account as a tool for something. The fact that the persona was never clearly weaponized doesn't mean it wasn't there.
- chmod775 3y agoWhat? There was like 3-4 accounts that we know of. There is absolutely nothing here that that requires more than one person with a few hours of time on their hand each day. Also their behavior doesn't mesh with being a state actor or organization - why would they throw away their admin account to get a last laugh in an internet argument? Why would their cover be an admin account of bad enough temperament and decision-making that it draws attention to itself and risks getting banned? This is utter nonsense.