Talk:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax

Can you produce other sources for some of these claims other than Ratwiki or Encyclopedia Dramatica? RobS^{Deep Six the Deep State!} 15:44, 19 July 2019 (EDT)

This article may not be worth keeping. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2019 (EDT)

The guy appears to be a marginal kook. RobS^{Deep Six the Deep State!} 18:57, 19 July 2019 (EDT)

I'm Abd ul-Rahman Lomax, I've been a user here but have not edited since 2012. The creator of this article is likely the same person as behind the mess that I'm in court with the WMF over, and the same person as created 9 trolling/impersonation accounts on the 27th and 28th. (IThis is a pattern I first saw on Wikiversity and the WMF meta wiki. Massive account creations, abusive article names, all that. Account creations here the 27th and 28th:

• 2 impersonations and 1 ???
• 3 impersonations.
• 3 trolling and 3 impersonations 2 of the impersonations were of me.

going back, 10 days ago:

• 19:16, 19 July 2019 User account TomSuarezDinoCrisis (Talk | contribs) was created

Only edit, this article. The user name is immediately recognizable as from the sock family, I can tell you much about them if you want to know. This guy created the RatWiki article on me, and his brother created the ED article. It should also be realized that there is a huge cloud of confusion around what these users do. That's deliberate.

So, about the article:

• I am an American Muslim
• I am not a parapsychologist.
• I am not a "cold fusion researcher," I'm a journalist/blogger, but I have written about cold fusion under peer review in a mainstream multidisciplinary journal.
• I am indeed in court with the WMF, pro se. The case docket and links to all files are here.
• The cause of action is not as described. At this point the Amended Complaint is not in its final form and it has not been served on the other defendants. That will be remedied. To make it clear, Count 4 did address the ban, but that is being abandoned, leaving the primary counts.
• Count 1 is for defamation, against all defendants, but right now only the WMF is pertinent.
• Count 2 was specific about the WMF defamation, which is not from the ban, but from the publication of the ban, which, as content they originated, leaves them without Section 230 immunity. (This is why I'm abandoning Count 4, and I don't really want to edit WMF wikis anyway. I had already almost entirely abandoned them as unsafe. What then happened proved they were unsafe.
• Count 3 is for a conspiracy to harm and defame, hatched by collusion between the sock master you saw here, (who also created the RW article, and his brother, who then recruited others, such that six persons are believed to have complained to the WMF (one confessed to being canvassed).
• Count 4 was a claim of violation of implicit contract, damages limited to $1000 by the TOU, legally difficult and not worth pursuing for an individual.
• I have done no "creationist" studies.
• Nor did I do a "paranormalist" study. At the request of some scientists (including a Nobel Prize winner), I created a Wikiversity resource for studies in parapsychology, which is an actual science, and which is *not* a belief in the paranormal, but which is the scientific study of the paranormal, i.e, not-understood phenomena, generally involving the mind (hence psychology). I am a strong supporter of the scientific method, and a critic of "pseudoskepticism," which is belief in the error of others disguised as skepticism. I did very little work on that resource myself, I only set it up so that it would be neutral, and it had been so judged by an administrator.
• The deletion reasons for my work on Wikiversity were not that it was "pseudoscientific," but that it had not been approved by a committee that never existed before or since. It was a pure excuse, the 'crat admitted his actions were based on private emails. Just as had been threatened. This is outlined in the Amended Complaint.
• The WMF filed a Motion to Dismiss, relatively routine at the point and also, from precedent, unlikely to succeed. The most that is likely, if my case was defectively pled, is that I will be given an opportunity to amend it.
• The Foundation indeed retained Jones Day. I spent some days with Jones Day lawyers in a case in Florida a couple of years ago. Competent, cordial, and tough. I have a suspicion that they recommended to the WMF that they settle and the WMF refused (I know that twice, they took the time to ask), but I don't know what they recommended. Their stance with me was that I was wasting my time, I have no case, etc., which is more or less what I'd expect. I don't take it personally.
• I'm happy to answer any questions, use my talk page here, or I'll make sure that email is enabled. [No email here, but I'm Abdlomax on Reddit and there is the blog -- see the docket link above.]
• Thanks --Abd (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2019 (EDT)

Article creator

Who created the article? RobS^{Deep Six the Deep State!} 22:26, 29 July 2019 (EDT)

What kind of answer do you want? I don't know site policy about outing. However, I can state the obvious: the article was created by "TomSuarezDinoCrisis." "DinoCrisis" is a old R wiki account name for one of the proposed defendants in Lomax v. WMF, see the amended complaint and google "DinoCrisis." "Suarez" is a long-term critic of this person. Using account names like that is a long-term behavior of the person. However, it is also quite possible that this is an impersonation of the him, he has made many enemies. The page was immediately placed on archive.is, also a common behavior, 19 Jul 2019 19:26:17 UTC and, again, an impersonator might do that. The goal might have been to increase visibility for the R wiki and ED articles, which his enemies would not want to do. Instead, the goal of an enemy would be to make him look bad. He often claims he has been impersonated, but I have never actually found a proven case, aside from parody accounts (which are not intended to be taken as the person). --Abd (talk) 08:17, 30 July 2019 (EDT)

Orphan

This is an orphan page. Please create a reverse link somewhere and de-orphan it. Thank you. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 10:43, August 24, 2021 (EDT)