Talk:Brock Pierce

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Citations for Content That Keeps Getting Removed

Information about Piece's resignation from DEN over alleged sexual harassment keeps getting removed from the article. I want to put references here so that they are not lost as the article continues to have negative information removed.

Wired Magazine Article on Den IPO and sex trafficing charges brough against Piece http://www.wired.com/gaming/virtualworlds/magazine/16-12/ff_ige?currentPage=all

A DEN OF INIQUITY ; AFTER 3-YEAR EXILE, WEB EXEC FACES PERV CHARGES http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nypost/access/443848661.html?dids=443848661:443848661&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Nov+11%2C+2003&author=STEPHEN+LYNCH&pub=New+York+Post&edition=&startpage=037&desc=A+DEN+OF+INIQUITY+

DEN Founder Marc Collins-Rector Arrested in Spain After Two-Year Manhunt - VentureReporter.net Monday, May 20, 2002, 4:15 PM ET

FAST COMPANY 11/05/07: A high-flying Web start-up, DEN imploded among allegations of drug use, guns, and pedophilia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.229.2 (talk) 05:27, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

above you state that the Wired Magazine Article on Den IPO includes mention of "and sex trafficing charges brough against Piece http://www.wired.com/gaming/virtualworlds/magazine/16-12/ff_ige?currentPage=all ". I read the article and nowhere is the term trafficking even used, nor is there a single mention of charges of sex trafficking being brought against Pierce. It is a shame that some people are not even able to read, write without spelling errors and are intent on using wikipedia to spread false information and then lie that it is supported by a source when it explicitly is not. SMendel (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/03/bryan-singers-accusers-speak-out/580462/ The Atlantic: ‘Nobody Is Going to Believe You’ "The Bohemian Rhapsody director Bryan Singer has been trailed by accusations of sexual misconduct for 20 years. Here, his alleged victims tell their stories." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scransom (talk • contribs) 17:04, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ars Technica Article on Brock Pierce becoming a board member of the Bitcoin Foundation and the resignations that followed due to Pierce's sexual harassment allegations: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/05/some-in-bitcoin-group-resign-over-new-board-members-link-to-sex-abuse/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.27.181 (talk) 13:28, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, been fighting this battle for 12 years. --— OcatecirT 06:06, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

An ip address belonging to ogaming.com, 66.253.32.34, has been editing this article, removing information. Ogaming.com is registered to Brock Pierce. Wikipedia's stance on editing articles about oneself: "It is difficult to write neutrally about yourself. Therefore, it is considered proper on Wikipedia to let others do the writing. Instead, contribute material or make suggestions on the article's talk page and let independent editors write it into the article itself." Wikipedia:Autobiography

My edits were reversed for failing to mention them in the edit page. My apologies. On that note, though, the sourcing in this article does not support the references to sexual harassment allegations against the subject of this article. These are rather serious claims, and the only one of the three sources that even implies Pierce's involvement is a tabloid website. The others make no reference to Pierce in the context of sexual harassment allegations, other than to mention that they were denied by the company. These allegations simply do not belong in a encyclopedic article about an individual. The arrests in Spain, as well as the "fleeing" allegation, are also PoV, if not libelous.

all the sources document them leaving the country and the new york post article is not only cited in the sentence, but says almost verbatim what is in the article (don't just rely on the summary). - Ocatecir 21:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[1]: "The founders of flopcom Digital Entertainment Network (DEN) are still languishing in a Spanish jail, and investigators in the US are stepping up efforts to bring them home to face sex offence charges. DEN co-founders Marc Collins-Rector, Chad Shackley and Brock Pierce were arrested in June on an international warrant after being indicted in New Jersey on five counts of transporting a minor across state lines for the purpose of engaging in sexual acts." - Ocatecir 21:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I don't know how I missed the last citation, though it seems to me that it's the only one that supports the obviously central point of the sentence (which isn't that he left the United States, obviously). Good word and advice. Thanks. Groundworking 21:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Brock Pierce has left IGE - details a little unclear, but apparently its now owned by Jonathan Yantis, who was part of some company IGE bought. I also heard this from private sources in addition to the article linked below

http://f13.net/index.php?itemid=555


Brock Pierce has left Affinity Media (The umbrella company around Zam and formerly around IGE). I violate the neutrality rule since I work for Affinity, so I'll post it here on the Talk page.

http://www.affinitymedia.com/announcement.html Danalog 01:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Brock Pierce is a major shareholder in IGE" needs a more modern citation, since all of the affinity business has occurred since that article was written, and it is no longer apparent that he is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.7.47.183 (talk) 17:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

Someone should use this. Interesting stuff. The Decline and Fall of an Ultra Rich Online Gaming Empire Shrumster (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC) amended by Onanoff (talk) 10:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of story behind this guy. Plus a bonus connection to Steve Bannon, who took over from him as CEO of his flagship company. Detailed tellings of the story in the above main link, and:

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Brock Pierce. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:16, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brock Pierce. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:16, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claims of felonious conduct

Require more than "guilt by association" claims and references to civil lawsuits against others. He may be Satan Incarnate, but Wikipedia has strong protection for living persons, and we ought not ignore the policy. Collect (talk) 14:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Collect: Indeed. There seems to be some edit-warring going on over this, including enthusiastic attempts to censor the account of the article subject himself. MPS1992 (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Noted invitation to join a discussion but there is no discussion related to the reverted edit. The self-serving statement has no impact one way or another on the question of guilt by association. Assuming you think this particular discussion piece is relevant, explain how the deleted material assists in reducing a (perceived by Collect) guilt by association message in the article. I remind editors that their reversion of other editors' work must provide strong reasons. It is a discourtesy to make such reversions without reasons and, of course, gives rise to a technical edit-war condition much earlier than it otherwise may. So bear this in mind for your future editing. sirlanz 01:50, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Bear in mind that multiple editors have now taken issue with your additions. We do not include information on or even implication of serious crimes such as the exploitation of children based on the fact that someone he was associated with was convicted. If some other individual was convicted, and they have a main article, the information should be added there. GMGtalk 14:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's understandable that GreenMeansGo might have got the wrong end of the stick here. The material the subject of differing views is not my addition. I took the first step which was to delete the material. One other editor thinks the material should stay; another thinks it should stay but subject to some changes for neutrality. sirlanz 01:42, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
From taking a look at the sources (and others) its clear its only by association - personally I find the claims he was unaware of being wanted dubious given the circumstances and timing but its also very clear that a)there is no criminal charges related to him that were ongoing, b)the articles when talking about the criminal charges are almost entirely about his associate, with Pierce only mentioned in passing as his co-founder/employee etc. So I would not include any of the material per BLP. Only in death does duty end (talk) 15:55, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The event was well covered in the media and has ongoing coverage with the subsequent documentary. Inclusion is WP:DUE and we will not censor it out of the article just because some WP:SPA accounts are here to challenge it. There is plenty of coverage (entire articles) relating to Michael Jackson's sexual abuse allegations (many of which were dropped or settled out of court). Jtbobwaysf (talk) 05:06, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Michael Jackson settled lawsuits out of court for cash settlements and has living people who still accuse of him sexual abuse. Brock did not settle with any of the plaintiffs and they ALL voluntarily retracted their civil suit against him, after which they apologized to him. The chief plaintiff, Michael Egan, who initially asked Pierce to join the lawsuit as another Plaintiff (since Pierce himself was a minor at the time of the alleged abuse), has been convicted in federal court for fraud (see here: https://variety.com/2015/biz/news/bryan-singer-michael-egan-sex-abuse-1201656874/ ) and has openly admitted to making up false claims of sexual abuse to extort wealthy individuals and enrich himself. Jackson is also dead, and Pierce is alive, which means the bar for writing libelous material about Pierce on wikipedia page is much higher. SMendel (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "Child sexual abuse allegations" as a sub heading

@Ghettoblaster

Removing this as a sub under Digital Entertainment Network is justified. The article clearly states he was a minor at the time and all charges against him were dropped. The predator was Marc Collins-Rector. As a seperate heading, it is potentially libelous. I didn't remove the content although that could be up for debate because this was another "guilt by association" claim. Oscarmckinney (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you are an WP:SPA. Do you have a WP:COI relating to this article? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 04:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am not an WP:SPA and I do not have a WP:COI relating to this article. I'm surprised this edit has sparked such a backlash as I did not remove any of the factual content.Oscarmckinney (talk) 18:25, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will just add this, from the wikipedia guidelines on articles written about living people: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libelous." The lawsuit in question was retracted by the plaintiff and the plaintiff later admitted to fabricating multiple stories in an effort to receive cash settlements. Given this context, it IS libelous to present a retracted case by an admitted fraud not by its actual legal title but with the libelous term, "Sexual abuse allegations." — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMendel (talk • contribs) 04:46, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional edits

SMendel (talk · contribs) I rolled back your edits as you have been adding what appears to be promotional content to this article. Please review WP:MOS and note that the long quotes are not acceptable, and generally promotional wording is also not allowed. Please also disclose if you have an WP:COI to this article. This article is about a cryptocurreny subject and sanctions are currently in place on this range of articles. Thank you! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 05:34, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jtbobwaysf (talk · contribs) I was not writing any promotional content on this article. Read the edits and point to one promotional thing I wrote. Everything I wrote was based on recent news sources and most of it direct quotes. Wikipedia is a place that was created for accurate information to be disseminated and I think that your attempt to censor my referencing and citation of dozens of actual news sources about the subject of the article goes against the principles of this platform. I have no WP:COI to this article. I am someone who is reads the news and follows cryptocurrency and politics closely. I noticed that the wikipedia page was missing much of the latest news about Pierce so I decided to add to the page to more accurately reflect the current information with sources that are publicly available on unbiased news publications and websites. I would like you to closely read all of the edits I made and reconsider your hasty attempt to censor me because of your pre-judgement. I explicitly cited a Master's Dissertation by someone who is arguably unsympathetic to Pierce and discusses a relationship between energy colonialism and cryptocurrency. SMendel (talk) 05:57, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
taking into account your comment about long quotes, I edited the article accordingly to remove long quotes and made sure that my writing style adheres to the wikipedia norms. SMendel (talk) 06:25, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a WP:COI relating to this article? Please remove all the quotes you have added, they are generally not WP:DUE. A masters dissertation is not an WP:RS on this article, nor are any blogs, etc. Please remove all that. There is a clearly established consensus to clamp down on promotionalism and strengthen sourcing in crypto subject articles, thus your revert is a violation of policy. You have admitted you are a cyptocurrency enthsiast and this is a crypto subject, you must follow those guidelines. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 02:34, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@David Gerard: maybe you could watch this article. Seems that the article is now subject of PR edits. Large insertion of content relating to article subject's wife, some quaisy philanthropic organization, quite possibly paid PR edits. I did a rollback, which was reverted by the user that added it, and so I subsequently have gone through and removed some of the bad sources, but in general its a lot of spin. Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 09:58, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bitcoin foundation

It says on this article that the subject is the chairman of the bitcoin foundation. But there do not seem to be any WP:RS to support this. Is this true? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, the text of this article states that "[t]he organization announced its insolvency in July 2015." In addition, the Bitcoin Foundation article describes the entity using the past tense, so it's not clear to me whether this foundation even currently legally exists. In a web search, there are passing mentions of Pierce as being the chairman of a Bitcoin Foundation, but nothing substantial, and it's unclear to me whether this is the same Bitcoin Foundation that's wikilinked in the infobox (it's possible for two nonprofits to have the same name). Aoi (青い) (talk) 08:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the same thing. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 21:12, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RFC heading

Subject

Hi, shall we call this sub-heading

  • A. Burton v. Collins-Rector et al lawsuit

-or-

  • B. Sexual abuse allegations

Discussed above on this talk page and also highlighted in this diff Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Polling

Discussion

  • I favor "sexual abuse allegations" as it summarizes the section, that include both a lawsuit and an arrest. It is not limited to a lawsuit. Note this article is often subject of promotional edits, see notes above on this talk page. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 23:14, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It is very clear that Jtbobwaysf is intent on making libelous edits that spin voluntarily retracted allegations as current. this is a violation of Wikipedia's guidelines on pages about living people. Moreover, this user has removed edits I and other editors I made under the false pretense that I have a conflict of interest and made promotional edits. Just because you do not agree with someone's edits, does not make them wrong or promotional. Every edit i made was sourced in recent news articles and was written in an objective, unbiased voice. By contrast, the edits [User:Jtbobwaysf|Jtbobwaysf]] has made constitute vandalism of this page insofar as he removed parts of Pierce's life and career that have been established in the media and were added to the page by volunteer editors such as myself. I hate to see a living or even dead person's name tainted by false accusations and slander. SMendel (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Stop talking about them, stop responding to them. It's not constructive, and it only makes it more difficult to get any sort of consensus. We get it, you two disagree. That's why there are other editors here responding to the RFC. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    agreed. SMendel (talk) 22:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Concur with Jtbobwaysf.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove from career, put in personal life without it's own heading. Sexual abuse allegations is a loaded heading for allegations that were dropped without settlement. There's also a victimization angle to look at, as the subject was also a minor at the time. Also, it wasn't part of his career, so why keep it there. It can be moved to personal life, without a heading, and provide all the necessary context. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC) (Summoned by bot)[reply]
I support this move to put in personal life. There has been an effort to water down the allegations aka down-weight (or remove entirely at times). The allegations are the subject of a whole section of a movie, pretty in-depth coverage and the attempt to down-weight or remove is ongoing on this article. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I also support moving this section to personal life without its own heading. I agree with ScottishFinnishRadish that "Sexual abuse allegations is a loaded heading for allegations that were dropped without settlement." Jtbobwaysf is incorrect and perhaps slanderous to compare the allegations against Pierce to those levelled at Michael Jackson for three important reasons: 1) Michael Jackson has numerous living accusers and was openly courting little children to sleep at his house, making the allegation of sexual abuse very believable. Many of Jackson's accusers hold fast to their accusations of abuse. He also paid settlements to some of them, further adding weight to the narrative of his accusers. In contrast, there is not a single living person who is currently accusing Brock Pierce of sexual assault. Every single person in the lawsuit who accused Pierce has apologized and voluntarily retracted their suit against him without any settlement. The only money paid was a little over $20k that Pierce paid to the lawyer of the plaintiff for his legal fees (as the lawyer did not want to drop the case without being paid). 2) the main accuser/plaintiff in the civil suit (I repeat this was a civil and not a criminal case), Michael Egan, has admitted to falsely fabricating stories of sexual abuse in order to receive cash settlements in addition to being literally convicted by the Federal government for fraud. This completely discredits the allegations against Pierce. 3) Brock Peirce is a living person. Michael Jackson is dead. This is a major distinction for wikipedia as wikipedia establishes explicit protections to prevent libelous and slanderous information from being spread on pages about living people.
SMendel (talk) 20:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No opinion on the merits of this, but we can't possibly use an argument from the subject's own personal website as a reliable source for any of this. In fact, including these arguments on this talk page may well be a BLP violation against Egan since they're not being reported by a reliable source. Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:49, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Before you responded I was going to collapse or refact a fair amount of that. Along with the possible BLP problems, it's just way off topic for this RFC. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
see source here: https://variety.com/2015/biz/news/bryan-singer-michael-egan-sex-abuse-1201656874/ SMendel (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
and see source here: https://www.thewrap.com/bryan-singer-accuser-michael-egan-sentenced-to-2-years-in-prison-over-fraud-case/ he was not just convicted. he served time in federal prison for fraud. Federal prosecutors called him a fraud and a "schemer." SMendel (talk) 21:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marine toys for tots

@96.86.0.73:, we got an edit from someone claiming to be with Marine Toys for Tots and stated they had no affiliation. I will WP:AGF here and assume this is correct. If you would like to disclaim the affiliation, please issue an announcement on your official social media channel (eg twitter/fb), in the press, or on your website and we will add that you have disclaimed this affiliation. An editor rightly re-added the content, as absent some other content, we have to follow what the sources say. Thank you! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unregistered editors do not receive ping notifications. You may want to leave a message on the IP's user talk page. Aoi (青い) (talk) 10:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I have made that edit and created the talk page for the IP editor. I suspect unlikely they see it, but can try... Jtbobwaysf (talk) 12:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Brock_Pierce"