Talk: Justice League Unlimited

W-Hat was made as a haven for SomethingAwful users that were LEGITIMATE Second Life users or content devs, it was formed after LL banned all avatars in one of the largest SA groups, with no consideration whatsoever to innocence or guilt. As a result, W-Hat had an overt anti-griefing stance, and any griefer reported to group administration received a swift kick after investigation / verification.

What does this have to do with the article? No connection I can see.

I rewrote the entire entry to be more neutral, I ask that the JLU Member "Tarantulas" who has been reverting the page please recognize and respect the neutral and unbiased nature of Wikis, if he feels any part of my change is unfair or biased, I ask that he brings it up in discussion for debate. Thank you.

Citidel 03:07, April 24, 2010 (UTC)

Bias

Hello Paladin Proto AKA Kalel Venkman,

I put in so many Herald Article Links in my rewrite simply because there aren't that many sources of information on the JLU, I didn't want to put up information about the controversies without referencing outside sources, my choices were either the Herald which is potentially biased, or Krypton Radio which is unquestionably biased, there was no "commercial" motivation as you suggest. Additionally, in the case of your DMCA takedowns against the Herald, and Nikola's leak to the Herald, the Herald was intrinsically involved in the controversy itself, and linking to the story is proof of it's existence as well as a reference. I could put in companion links to Krypton Radio, but the only event of those controversies that your blog covered was the 2nd wiki leak. If you would like to suggest a more reputable source of publicly posted information, please do.

I so far can't find any actual proof that the Justice League was one of the top trusted estates on BanLink, which is why I took out the statement entirely, if you have such a link verifying this information, please post it. Additionally, I think it's somewhat misleading to attribute the Justice League Unlimited's success in Banlink to it's "association" with the group GridWatch, a group the Justice League Unlimited founded, entirely owns, and currently operates.

I don't think you can call having a blog a "gift to the people of Second Life", unless you would consider the Alphaville Herald or any other blog to also be a "gift to the people of Second Life", this sounds too much like unnecessarily praising voice.

If you wish to feature charity work so prominently in the article, I think it should come with references to the charity work done, as I don't think that prominent charity work is what the Justice League Unlimited has become known for, nor does it seem to be the main point of the group's existence; it's even mentioned last in the Second Life group description itself.

I reverted back to the old article, but made changes based on your comments. I took out the reference to GridWatch as "comic related", I added a link to the Krypton Radio post regarding the 2010 wiki leak, and I took out the alphaville herald references where Alphaville herald wasn't directly involved in the controversy (i.e.: when take-downs were sent against it, or when Nikola picked the Herald to leak the information too).

Besides that, you removed a lot of information in your revision, can you defend what makes these things "Heavily biased"?

{C {C}{C --Citidel 18:09, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

No attempt should be made to weight the Herald over Krypton Radio as a more credible source of information on the events surrounding the League, as this should be left to the reader. A fair and balanced approach shows one link each to the Herald and to Krypton Radio.

Krypton Radio is loaded with references to our charity work, so this is not at issue.

Krypton Radio is a gift to the people of Second Life - it is not just a blog, but a radio station. That's why it's called "Krypton Radio", and not just "Krypton Blog" or something else. Krypton Radio takes no payment for its advertising, and the radio station itself is intended as a gift to the people of Second Life, so the statement is accurate.

Also, the Herald is hardly an "outside source", since its publication of materials stolen from the BrainiacWiki is at the very center of the contraversy surrounding the League. The Herald was not reporting the news. The Herald made a direct effort to become the news, and as such should not be considered in any more weight than the opposing view offered by Krypton Radio. Most of the articles in the Herald are actually about itself and how it interacted with the League, not the event of the leak itself. Each are equally biased.

The status of the League's ranking in BanLink is a matter of historical record, but known only to former active participants in the BanLink system. I have rewritten this section to remove the ranking claim in BanLink, since the only way for a person not directly involved with BanLink themselves to verify this would be to personally seek out and interview former participants.

I also clarified the fact that GridWatch is wholly owned and operated by the League (this was not always true, but is true now.)

And yes, you are correct, Paladin Proto is Kalel Venkman.

--Paladin Proto 15:03, May 16, 2010 (UTC)

Also, changed the tone of the statement on the factual basis of Krypton Radio being a gift to the people of Second Life to be more observational than expository.

--Paladin Proto 13:55, May 17, 2010 (UTC)

I am curious as to why you are posting as "Paladin Proto", when you have a wikia account already named "KalelVenkman", indeed judging by your profile page, it would seem you created this account for the sole purpose of reverting my article.

I don't disagree that the Herald is biased, and I would like to include a Krypton Radio link in companion with each Herald one, however so far as I've found, the Krypton Radio has only reported on one of the events, and in this case I did pair up a krypton radio link with the Herald one. There are very little sources of information about the league and all of them are biased in some way, as such my choices are to pair up counter-point biased links from Krypton Radio, but there aren't enough to fully companion the Herald ones, or take the ones where there's only one Herald link out entirely, which unfortunately leaves the information without reference. The third option would be to link to the JLU wiki itself, but yours is closed, and the public one currently posted may be taken down at some point, plus I imagine you would dislike that even more. One of the reasons I posted Herald links was actually because it wasn't always an "outside source", in some of these events referenced, the Herald was at the center of the controversy such as the DMCAs, they were linked not as news, but reference to the event itself. Additionally, regardless of being biased, the Herald does at least source it's information, indeed the Herald's tendancy to source it's information was the cause of your DMCAs against their site for the posting of wiki material. In fact, your DMCA's against the Herald's sourced wiki materials proves that the material was indeed from the Wiki and accurate, otherwise you would have committed perjury in claiming right to it.

I have changed the Krypton Radio reference to include "which it finances without the support of advertisements.", any usage of the word "gift" sounds too much like praising voice, as it implies gratitude. Additionally, as before, I would suggest that if you wish to feature charity work so predominately that you provide references to it, as charity work does not seem to be the main goal of the Justice League Unlimited nor is it what the group is most famous (or infamous) for. I would also point out that the charity work is still mentioned in my article and each organization named in full, but it is mentioned more in a format similar to your group's description.

I have removed references to banlink for two reasons, I can't verify any of this information, and since the system is no longer active, it seems to be a moot point designed only to praise the JLU as trustworthy. I could rewrite the section to make it less matter-of-fact, but at that point the whole snippet of information would be very ephemeral.

I notice as well you changed the 2010 wiki leak to say that it had leaked 30% of the material, whereas I had 80%, I got this information from the public JLU site, which claims "20% of all articles are missing(710 bad/3468 total)", are you suggesting that 3,468 articles is only about 30% of the total size of the wiki?

I asked before: "Besides that, you removed a lot of information in your revision, can you defend what makes these things "Heavily biased"?" this wasn't answered, so I'll point some of the things that were removed from my article without specific reference or anything besides a vague claim of "heavy bias", I will also point out that I have incorporated every piece of your article into mine, and where I haven't I have given reason for not including it.

So please, what is heavily biased about these statements?

• "The group is notable for their use of comic book hero appearances such as Superman, Batman, and Green Lantern and for being one of the few Anti-griefer groups to operate a member-only information wiki."
• "has been resident of the sims: Isere, Verbier, and Asimov Island."
• "The Justice League Unlimited group logo was designed for the group by resident and ex-JLU member Netwonder Widget parodying the official Justice League of America logo"
• "The Justice League Unlimited is unique among the Anti-griefer groups in SL largely due to their extensive wiki titled "Brianiac Wiki" named after the Superman villain Brainiac. The Wiki is only accessible by Justice League Unlimited members, and is used for the purpose of storing information on suspected griefers, griefer groups, JLU friendly contacts, JLU friendly groups, chat logs, JLU meeting logs, and people and groups of interest to the JLU."
• "The 2010 Wiki leak brought to light documents showing that Linden Lab employee Plexus Linden had promised the Justice League Unlimited abilities above and beyond that of a normal resident to help their anti-griefer and peacekeeping activies."
• "This was compounded when it was discovered that Plexus Linden had promised them that their copyright infringement of DC Comic's intellectual property would be overlooked by Linden Lab."

That's most of the information that was removed under claim of heavy bias, but with no specific reference defending the claim. Can you defend this removal?

--Citidel 18:51, May 18, 2010 (UTC)

I notice you've done a revert without acknowledging the discussion page (and the numerous points and questions I had posed to you about your changes), additionally I notice you've been deliberately labeling your changes as "reverting vandalism", which is simply untrue and malicious. You may not be used to fair and balanced discourse, but this is not vandalism, this is trying to find neutral ground in what is obviously a very biased topic. If you wish to continue reverting pages, please explain your reasons why and do not neglect the discussion, otherwise please take your changes elsewhere. I will leave the page as it is now to avoid an edit war as best I can, but if I don't see a response to the discussion after a day, I'll be doing another revert.

--Citidel 20:10, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Reverted due to lack of discussion response.

{C {C}{C --Citidel 02:00, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

• The paragraph on BrainiacWiki has been restored and clarified to include the Brainiac system as well. Most people do not realize that this is not one system, but two.

• Netwonder Widget did design our logo - but it was not a parody, nor was it designed after any other logo. The design is entirely original, and represents neither a trademark nor a copyright infringement - trademark, because we sell nothing using this logo (and it is original) and copyright, because the symbol or similar symbol was used nowhere before we had it.
• The statements about Plexus Linden are completely inaccurate, and are not supported by the information in the BWiki leak. While we did have a relationship with Plexus, he:
  • Never guaranteed that we would have powers and abilities above those of normal citizens.
  • Never told us anything about being immune from copyright or trademark concerns from DC Comics.

Apart from this, it's obvious to the casual observer that you are attempting to paint yourself as being unbiased, while the material you post itself is anything but. If you would like to tell us who you are, "Citidel" (Citadel has only one "i" in it, by the way), and demonstrate that you are not affiliated in any way with of the groups having an axe to grind, it might lend more weight to your criticisms.

--Paladin Proto 00:19, May 24, 2010 (UTC) (Kalel Venkman)

I used your changes to the Brainiac Wiki section and included it.

While you may believe that your logo is original, look at the JLA Logo and compare it to your own, I can hardly think that's a coincidence that Netwonder designed a logo almost identical to the Justice League of America logo for Justice League Unlimited. I hate to break it to you, but the logo was not entirely original and designed from the ground up for the JLU group, it's a parody of the JLA logo.

Both of the statements regarding Plexus are found in your wiki and on the Herald articles which you insist on removing, the logs to which can both be found here. I am however willing to compromise by letting those be removed due to not enough references.

I find it interesting that you wish to attempt to invalidate any points I have by pointing out the lack of an identifiable Second Life name, when you yourself created a brand new account using an obscure name to disconnect yourself from the JLU when you did these reverts on my article. I am not a part of any griefer group, nor am I a part of the JLU or rival vigilante group.

Please do not suggest that I am biased when I am actively trying to discuss and find a neutral ground to these facts, while you are ignoring discussions and calling my edits "vandalism" of the article: calling my latest change "Pro-woodbury Vandalism", Woodbury has not even been mentioned in this article, besides by you. As I said before, the suggestion that my edits have been vandalism is malicious and false, and I request you stop referring to it as such.

Let me redirect you to questions and points you have ignored:

• I have changed the Krypton Radio reference to include "which it finances without the support of advertisements.", any usage of the word "gift" sounds too much like praising voice, as it implies gratitude. Additionally, as before, I would suggest that if you wish to feature charity work so predominately that you provide references to it, as charity work does not seem to be the main goal of the Justice League Unlimited nor is it what the group is most famous (or infamous) for. I would also point out that the charity work is still mentioned in my article and each organization named in full, but it is mentioned more in a format similar to your group's description.
• I have removed references to banlink for two reasons, I can't verify any of this information, and since the system is no longer active, it seems to be a moot point designed only to praise the JLU as trustworthy. I could rewrite the section to make it less matter-of-fact, but at that point the whole snippet of information would be very ephemeral.
• I notice as well you changed the 2010 wiki leak to say that it had leaked 30% of the material, whereas I had 80%, I got this information from the public JLU site, which claims "20% of all articles are missing(710 bad/3468 total)", are you suggesting that 3,468 articles is only about 30% of the total size of the wiki?

Would you care to comment on this?

--Citidel 02:18, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

While the logos do look similar, remember that the JLU logo was created in 2006 - the logo you have shown me dates from 2008, two years later. I have so far found no examples that predate our design. If you can find one, I will concede this point.

I have clearly identified myself as Kalel Venkman - your complaint of my hiding behind anonymity is therefore void. It is an issue which you yourself have not addressed, however. It is very easy to hide behind a pseudonym - it is harder to stand out in the open and be counted. Forgive my hastiness - it is the way of our opponents to openly wage a public relations war, the articles in the Herald being the primary product of that war.

• The BanLink reference was originally written when BanLink was still active, though I think I'd have to scroll through the page's history to find the date when it was originally placed. At the time, it was verifiable. When BanLink went down, the text was changed to reflect this. I can see why you would say this information is unsupportable by independent research - all that remains of BanLink is the security community's memory of its use. We can remove the BanLink reference (as there is new information regarding the League's work on the Phantom Zone which is much more relevant that can be added later.)
• Providing references to the charity work could easily be done - there are numerous articles on CNN and our own radio station's web site on this. In the spirit of collaboration, I will submit the list here in the discussion page for review before posting them to the article itself.
• There is no "public JLU site", as you claim, other than http://kryptonradio.com. There are two remaining mirrors of stolen materials from the BrainiacWiki (the rest having been taken down), but any information one might obtain from that site should be considered higly suspect, owing to the intent behind the theives to discredit the League and distort its public reputation. The League does not control or maintain the content of these mirrors. Their content is subject to any sort of editing which the thieves and their accomplices may have seen fit to perform. In short, they may contain about as much disinformation as information. Also, the thieves missed downloading a substantial portion of the wiki owing to their failure to collect anything more than the wiki's "Main" namespace, so they did not, in fact, gain more than 30% of the total available material. The lesson here is that the stolen wiki should not be used as reliable documentation.

Regarding the statements about Plexus Linden - what you found was, in fact, what Plexus said to us, and accurately described our interaction with him. However, it does not contain other documentation which, not being in the League, you could not know about: that while Plexus may have been speaking from the heart, he did not, in fact, have the ability to make these guarantees or promises, and his efforts did not have broad support within the Linden GTeam at the time. I'm certainly willing to lay that out on the table, but I am strongly disinterested in bringing the Herald's voice into every possible public statement about the League since it is well known to be an openly hostile voice. The Herald is not a true journalistic outlet, known widely for their extreme bias in these matters. One should not cite the Herald as being any less biased than the Krypton Radio site, which, since we run it, is also an undeniably biased source of information.

Also, I have rewritten the section on Nikola Shirakawa. He was not responsible for the wiki leak in 2007, and was not ejected for this. He was removed regarding another security breach involving the Patriotic Nigras. The wiki leak from 2007 was the result of a bug in IE6 which allowed people to bypass PHP session restrictions. Only about 6.5% of the wiki was stolen in 2007. It only appeared large because the information was all captured in screenshots - this resulted in a piratable archive of about 50Mb, nearly all of which were enormous JPG files.

Though most of the people no longer in the League leave on pleasant terms, on rare occasion we do have troublesome individuals like Nikola with which to contend, but that particular pair of dots does not, in fact, connect.

Also, I have removed the links to the specific Herald articles, though I have left the content describing them. It occurred to me that the reason many of the sites we ordered removed were taken down was because they supplied links to disputed materials under the Digital Millenium Copyright act. This is technically illegal, and I am completely within my rights to attempt to enforce this. Removing the links is the simplest means of addressing this - the other option would have been to demand the deletion of the entire page, which I believe would be much more objectionable to all concerned. It is this kind of aggressive posture, by the way, which makes me doubt your intent. (Posting a link to a place where the material can be pirated directly? Really?) Linking to illegally posted intellectual property is, itself, illegal under the DMCA.

Also, I have readded a mention of the dispute of copyrighted characters and trademarks, since that seems to have gone missing, and is a recurring theme in League criticism.

--Paladin Proto 14:08, May 24, 2010 (UTC) (Kalel Venkman)

{C {C}{C Here's a picture of the cover of JLA #1 , published in January of 1997, the logo was used for the entire run of JLA comics, from January 1996 to February 2006. However, you're right on the usage of the word "Parody", as it does imply comedic usage, I changed the wording to say "As a tribute to" instead.

Yes, you clearly identified yourself as Kalel Venkman AFTER I pointed out that you were him), you did not willingly nor immediately give up this fact. Why use a brand new account to post here with an obscure name, rather than use your already made and used account: KalelVenkman, if not for the reason to disconnect the name from the JLU? I should also point out that one of your own rank: GreenLantern Excelsior, has also been posting and changing edits here under the pseudonym "Tarantulas".

If I could find some verifiable information on the Banlink trust systems during operation it would be fine, but there are simply no references for it anymore. Phantom Zone information would be better.

Regarding Charity Work: That would be fine, posting references to the work itself would lend credibility to the article in fact.

The site I was referring to was one of the leaked wiki mirrors, yes. While I certainly don't disagree that a leak could be seen as untrustworthy, so far any information I've found has not been disputed, and I've never seen any JLU members point out examples of changed or distorted information. Not to mention that the task of falsifying and changing so much information would be quite an undertaking. Regardless, the nature of the wiki that you pointed out was one of the reasons I did not use it as a link reference in the article.

I will concede to your points on Plexus, the information is far too vague to be considered factual wiki material, the references have already been removed however.

The problem with links is that so far as I find, all sources of information on the JLU are biased, and the best sources are Krypton Radio for biased toward, and the Herald for biased against, which is why I wanted to provide two links for each reference, one from Krypton Radio and one from the Herald.

As I remember it, the 2007 Wiki leak had "Nikola Shirakawa" logged in, much the same as the 2010 one has Haruhi Thespian logged in. Unfortunately, I no longer have a copy to verify this with, so I will have to concede to your revisions on the subject.

In regards to the DMCA, as you wrote yourself in one of the revisions to the Controversy section, "The question of the legality of both the League's action regarding the use of the DMCA and the Herald's response was never resolved by the courts, and no further action was taken against the Herald despite successful takedowns elsewhere.". You have never proved legal ownership to the wiki and all it's contents, nor that the Herald's usage of the leaked wiki was illegal, therefore you cannot suggest that linking to it is illegal. If you wish to pursue this and prove one way or another, I would suggest filing a lawsuit with the Herald. However, I believe there may have been a misunderstanding regarding Piratebay as well: I had a link next to it, but that was not a link to Piratebay, it was a link to the Krypton Radio article on the wiki leak provided as a reference.

Even so, due to the unbalanced nature of the references, I will reluctantly concede to their full removal, to be replaced with your descriptions of the links. I would prefer not to leave such information without reference, but you are correct in that posting to the Herald with no counterpoint is unbalanced, and the Herald has a number of other issues. As long as we have enough information that, if people wish to verify, they can look it up themselves.

Changes/Points of Dispute in this Revision:

• Minor editing
• Removed reference to DMCA dispute (see above for reasons)
• Rewrote JLU's usage of copyright characters controversy section to be a bit more straight factual.
• Removed "whom the League had discovered were involved in real life criminal activity as well" regarding real life information in the wiki. You're calling anyone who you had real life information on, a real life criminal, can you defend this point? From what I had heard from other JLU members, the reason that such information was kept on some of the more notorious griefers was in case they decided to enact some real life crime against the Justice League Unlimited, not because they were already considered real life criminals.

--Citidel 19:00, May 24, 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the logo, "as a tribute to" might be too kind a voice. We honestly believed that we had an original design, and you have uncovered prior art, quite literally. Perhaps just saying that it is similar would be enough.

Regarding the veracity of the content, there are literally hundreds of pages of content - even we have not been able to verify each posted page, but we have found instances where what was posted was changed from the original. Naturally, we would have to open the wiki to the public to show this, and this is rather counter to the point of having a privately held document. It is true that it would take a tremendous effort to distort the record presented, but also keep in mind that some of our opponents are unemployed or underemployed teenagers with literally nothing better to do with their time than to attempt something like that.

Regarding offering one link each from Krypton Radio and the Alphaville Herald, I believe this is a fair approach - however, the link from the Herald must not contain actual misappropriated content. If you can find such a reference in the Herald, this would be acceptable.

Regarding Nikola Shirakawa as being the account logged in during the 2007 theft, that may have been true. However, we were able to verify that it was a bug in IE6, and we had been having problems with the BWiki believing that posters were somebody other than the person logged in and had quite a time untangling exactly who had posted what. There was not a strong enough tie to Nikola to know for certain that he was the one and only thief, and the list of other suspects was rather lengthy - and at length, Nikola may have provided others with some (but not all) of the access codes to the BrainiacWiki, but this was only indirectly the cause of his removal.

Regarding the Plexus Linden material, it's accurate as far as it went - but only as far as it went. The Herald cherry-picked the material and removed it from its surrounding context. The part they omitted was the end-game, wherein we discovered that he was not speaking from a position of strength, and we suspected well that he might not be at the time. The stolen wiki materials omit all the talk pages, so substantial informational context is simply missing from the stolen records.

Regarding the DMCA issue: it was up to the Herald to impeach our claim to copyright - this they never did. Nor did we press the matter further there. However, this does not invalidate our claim to copyright, nor protection under copyright law. I confess that I did not check the link to the PirateBay material, that was my error. That link could be restored.

Regarding the few incidences of real life information kept on the more notorious griefers, in each case we had direct information that they had committed some sort of real world crime. This was not information collected as part of a defensive posture - rather, it was information gathered at the request of real life law enforcement to be turned over to them (which in every case, happened). The Leaguers you spoke to either had joined the League after that period in the League's history, or had been otherwise underinformed.

I have to say, this is starting to look pretty good.

The history of the League is a very long one, and it's very hard to establish a neutral balance considering that nearly everything written about the League is polarized either positively or negatively, with the Herald being used as a bludgeon by the people who've had the most trouble at our hands. Unlike the glory-seeking griefer community, the League kept a low profile in the press until about the last year, when we realized that, like it or not, we were fighting a public relations battle as well as just being busy trying to do the right thing on the grid itself. In the pages of the Herald, criminals are heroes, and the civic minded are evil. The Herald is also very widely read. Uncountered, they would simply define the history of Second Life without check or balance. Seeing an attempt at balance here is very very refreshing.

--Paladin Proto 19:29, May 25, 2010 (UTC) (Kalel Venkman)

Well, I'm thinking even if you didn't know about it, I'm willing to bet Netwonder did (the similarities are far too much to be a coincidence), I think it's fine as it is now.

You could still point out the pages that seemed changed and the content that's different, without mentioning the original content, it'd give less credibility but at least it'd say, "The JLU claims that these specific pages are falsified". Regardless, just about every place that could require a reference to the wiki itself has been removed by now, so it's not necessary to use the leaked wiki site anymore.

The Herald was using wiki material for just about all of it's stories, while you don't like this, I would say even so it's a good thing, since it sources the information rather than just making wild claims. Still, the problem is more lack of Krypton links to match the Herald ones, it may be better just to cut the links entirely, with the information about Plexus and promises and copyright protection removed due to lack of references and evidence, most of the information in the controversies section is public knowledge to anyone who's interested.

I will defer to your first hand knowledge on the subject of the 2007 wiki leak, your rewrite of that section is fine how it is then.

Regarding Plexus Linden, well I might suggest that promises from a Linden are still something of interest, even if he had know power to actually back those promises in the actual company infrastructure. Even so, you're correct in that there is very little public data regarding it, and there's probably a lot more to the story than that. The part about Plexus can stay out of the wiki.

As I understand DMCAs, they do not decide who owns rights to it, only absolves the hosting company from legal responsibility. So you sending a DMCA to a company and them taking down material doesn't prove you own it, it's just following proper procedure for the hosting company, then if the person counter-files the hosting company puts the material back up, this doesn't prove you don't own it either, only again the hosting company following proper procedure. From there the first party would have to take the second party to court (or vice versa), and then who actually owns what is decided. In lieu of that, nothing had been decided on ownership, and your rights regarding the wiki are the same as before, just as the Herald's rights to post the information are the same as before. The only thing that changed with the DMCA is that SixApart now cannot be sued for hosting the material. I could be wrong, as Copyright law isn't exactly a profession or a hobby, but that's how I've come to understand it. Certainly, I doubt that linking to the Herald is illegal unless you can prove in Court that you own the rights to the wiki and all contents inside it, which may be problematic since the Herald didn't post it as a full work, but as bits and pieces, which were in part: other people's information and conversations. So no DMCA notices should be necessary on the page, posting a link to the Piratebay torrent would have been sketchy of course, but I certainly wouldn't do that; I can see how having that link right next to the word "PirateBay" was confusing however.

In regards to the real life info, even so, it sounds a bit like making excuses rather than factual information. This is especially so since it's hard to verify, all we (who are not in the JLU) have to go off of is a partial and potentially compromised wiki leak. So I think it would be better off without that addendum to it.

One point of dispute: Perhaps the percentage numbers for the wiki compromised should be removed entirely in favor of less exact terminology like "A large amount of" or "a fraction", the pages taken in 2010 were around 3,468. If that's 30%, then the entire wiki must be around 11,560 pages long, that seems to be quite an improbably high number of pages for the wiki. Additionally, on the 2007 leak you claim that 170 pages is 6.5% of the wiki, doing the math, this means the wiki would be 2,615 pages long in it's entirety at the time, while in 2010: 3,468 pages is only 30% of the wiki, making the entire girth about 11,560 pages long. Granted the wiki is bound to grow over time, but that's an additional 8,092 pages in 3 years, making the wiki 333% larger than it was in 2007, that seems like quite a lot. I would rather use vague terminology for it unless we know for sure, I only used 80% in the first place as that's what the leaked wiki page statistics showed, that it was showing 2,758 out of 3,468 articles and 710 (20%) of them had become corrupted, assuming that the 3,468 articles was the entire wiki (excluding talk pages and history), that's where I got the 80% number from; but I could see how that could easily be wrong since it assumes that the people who got the wiki did in fact get every single page.

I'm glad we're settling on a neutral ground, and that you've seemingly decided to stop considering me a Herald-funded Woodbury Vandal.

{C {C}{C --Citidel 18:55, May 26, 2010 (UTC)

Balanced

I've reviewed your changes, and I agree with them. The article seems much more accurate and fairly balanced now.

--Paladin Proto 03:25, June 6, 2010 (UTC) (Kalel Venkman)

"Fairly Balanced" you say? Seeing as you have a past history of not only DMCAing websites that do not appeause to your liking, but now you are taking outside-websites and forcing heavy moderation as you have done on your own website.

Is KryptonRadio not censored enough for sheer control anymore? This article has been re-written the way the JLU want to be seen, not the entire facts and truths that have been vanished in the process.

I will never support the JLU's relentless data-harvesting on users that has been vigilantly supported by this group. Ever.

-Xilian

Revert war

ETA: Why the hell did you remove my discussion page post? Discussing citations is vandalism now? -- N3X15 02:22, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

According to the terms of service you are not entitled to "Post, upload, transmit, share, or store content which is unlawful, defamatory, infringing, obscene, or invasive of another's right to privacy or publicity".

The smear campaign was just that - a smear campaign. It does not have a place in a factual document. This is not the Second Life Herald. If you want to post it, post it there. They'll print anything.

TheListSl and third party forums lead the reader to violations of privacy and thousands of posts by sock puppets and propagandists. This is simply unacceptable.

--Paladin Proto 04:12, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

I did present the facts. Noting controversy about your group, rewording things (like changing decrying to criticism so that the article didn't present a bias towards the JLU), cross linking to other articles, fixing grammatical mistakes, and noting that the PN also attacked your group documents facts. But please, if you do see anything defamitory about this edit that you reverted, please point it out. Right now, all I'm seeing is someone blindly reverting edits to an article that badly needs reformatting, citation, and images. -- N3X15 10:45, October 12, 2011 (UTC)

Why are citied facts and information is being pulled from this wiki? Each time an update is added to the wiki it is reverted by Paladin Proto. There seems to be a problem of editing abuse going on.

PiercingTheDarkness 12:36, December 30, 2011 (UTC)PiercingTheDarkness

The "facts" being added are nothing of the sort, and the abuses are being blocked as needed by Wikia admins, thankfully. The revisions are being made by accounts registered on the day of the edit, with the sole purpose being to distort the public record on this one page.

--Paladin Proto 21:47, December 30, 2011 (UTC)

I've made the article balanced. Jim Korpov 06:59, January 30, 2012 (UTC)

Paladin Proto's blanking talk page message.

Removal of discussion - it had become just another Wrong Hands flame war. The main page continues to be vandalized on a routine basis, by the same people who started the flame war in the comments. They apparently don't want their new landlord at Nope getting wind of the fact that the last three landlords that supported the Wrong Hands before him all lost their estates and accounts because of it.

Note Jim Korpov's repeated removal of verified factual - and significantly damning - information about his cybergang, "The Wrong Hands". Korpov is strongly motivated to continue, for reasons that should be obvious to the casual observer.

--Paladin Proto 14:32, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

Note Paladin Proto's repeated removal of verified factual - and significantly damning - information about his cybergang, "Justice League Unlimited". Paladin is strongly motivated to continue, for reasons that should be obvious to the casual observer. Jim Korpov 23:43, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

"They apparently don't want their new landlord at Nope getting wind of the fact that the last three landlords that supported the Wrong Hands before him all lost their estates and accounts because of it."

I wasn't going to respond to this, but it makes me laugh everytime I read it. I don't know if you've forgotten or not, but it clearly states on The Wrong Hands wikia page we've been banned multiple times from Second Life and lost multiple sims. So please, next time you blank the talk page please write a better excuse. Anyway, back to editing a wiki nobody cares about except us! Jim Korpov 23:43, February 14, 2012 (UTC)

Removal of discussion - it had become just another Wrong Hands flame war. The main page continues to be vandalized on a routine basis, by the same people who started the flame war in the comments. --Paladin Proto 14:32, February 7, 2012 (UTC)

I'm Jim Korpov and I approve this message. --Jim Korpov 04:36, February 15, 2012 (UTC)