@record_116 But his behaviour on the Global Supercentenarian Forum does not have anything to do with how he has operated for validation organisations. I don't think it would be fair to punish him here for behaviour he has shown elsewhere. (Remember, last year he was appropriately warned for his lying and deceiving on the GSCF, so such measures have already been in place here.)

Alright, thanks very much for the explanation.

Posted by: @billy-robinson

↑

-- attachment is not available --

Milanq has been very strict on gerontology wiki. He also deleted every single post that is not helpful to the wiki

Posted by: @mrcatlord

↑

Milanq has been very strict on gerontology wiki. He also deleted every single post that is not helpful to the wiki

No forum is a source, kids don't understand what is necessary and what is not necessary on Gerontology Wiki, therefore they tried to create fake articles, and as a source they cited a link to a GSF post by Aquanaut which is not a reliable source. Nothing bad about GSF as a forum, but no other forum is a reference.

@billy-robinson and @MrCatlord, please don't create fake articles from unreliable sources, you are both registered on Gerontology Wiki, so try to contribute to Gerontology Wiki, not be provocateurs and not deal with what someone wrote where. More here on Gerontology Wiki: https://globalsupercentenarianforum.com/index.php/community/fans-discussion/gerontology-wiki/

Lately, one person with multiple accounts has been propagating something unnecessary on GW, the people who manage those accounts are unknown.

Why people hate me so much, why they think negatively about me, I really don't know. I just want to try to save the Gerontology Wiki from obsolescence, I see it's impossible, instead of helping me, they accuse me. Anyone who is not interested in the Gerontology wiki is under no obligation to edit anything, nor should they retaliate by creating a bunch of new two-sentence articles without any important information. I'm not going to bother myself with mass writing new articles after someone, mainly about false claims, I can finish the matter with one click.

If there is a thread on The 110 Club where there is propaganda against the Gerontology Wiki, there is no need to continue it here...

I know that many are in an unpleasant situation that GW recognizes only GRG, validations, but don't blame me for that, I don't participate in it at all, I deal with other updates, and other users, instead of helping me, they retaliate against me.

Posted by: @billy-robinson

↑

Attachment : inbound2657278045613466792.jpg

I am not sure what the point of your post is when you are closely working together with Milanq on the Gerontology Wiki?

Posted by: @dejan

↑

@billy-robinson and @MrCatlord, please don't create fake articles from unreliable sources, you are both registered on Gerontology Wiki, so try to contribute to Gerontology Wiki, not be provocateurs and not deal with what someone wrote where.

Please don't tell others what to do on the Global Supercentenarian Forum (or elsewhere) and what not; you're not above any other member here.

I am also not sure who you think you are telling others what to do and what not when you're still "a kid" yourself who has been exposed for creating fake and false documentation for supercentenarian claimants. Something with a pot and a kettle.

@admin I'll stop then.

I have not written anything negative about GSF as a forum anywhere, but I have warned other users on the Gerontology Wiki not to create fake articles from unreliable sources that this forum user "Aquanaut" told them about. He also told other children's on Gerontology Wiki what to do. I am not commanding anyone anywhere, just not allowing fake articles from unreliable sources to be created on Gerontology Wiki. Anyone who doesn't like the Gerontology Wiki is under no obligation to edit or visit it at all, but they don't need to cause further trouble by creating articles about false claims.

@billy-robinson, you posted a screenshot of a (now deleted) comment from Gerontology Wiki, and you expect to achieve something with it, you think you'll be able to motivate the Admin to block me, there's no point because I know I no wrong doing here on the forum, nothing negative anywhere.

The rules of this forum are that no one can be blocked until they commit enough violations, I have two warnings from before, I don't need a third violation, and I know some would like that. There should be no dictatorship here, my account was blocked on The 110 Club for unknown reasons, absolutely for no reason, I never wrote anything negative there...

I, Aquanaut_Chalk admit that I was the one who told Billy Robinson to post that screenshot. So @dejan, if you want to blame someone, blame me. Leave Billy alone. Someone sent me that screenshot via social media, and I asked Billy to post it. It wasn't right of me to ask him to post it, but I also don't think it's right calling the gsf an "unreliable source". You act like you're part of our community and contribute, but on other forums you criticize and bash the gsf. My intention was hoping that by other people reading that screenshot, they would realize you are backstabbing this community and approach talking to you with caution, because I have seen you manipulate people. I wanted to protect fellow members of this forum from being manipulated by you, the way you manipulated me. 

- A.C. 

Posted by: @aq

↑

also don't think it's right calling the gsf an "unreliable source".

The forum is not a reliable source (reference), not only the GSF, but also other forums, because the forums are dedicated to researchers having a discussion about supercentenarians. It is not a source, the original source is needed, not your or my GSF post.

I just wanted to say, a member has recently told me in the private chat, something that I find very disturbing and I feel I need to make this known to an admin.

... sorry for that long rant, it was a stupid post, and I shouldn't have started drama. Well it's over now

In that case, I've got a few issues of own to raise.

I am not a moderator or admin, but I personally believe that both 1 and 2 should have their moderator privileges taken away.

1 has been very rude to me in the private messaging. He accusing me of "trolling" the forum when I've done no such thing. He also called my research "dumb" and discouraged me from further researching the case of Januario Rubiano. Personally, I believe that this forum should be a safe space and bullying like this should not be tolerated. I think he should get 2 strikes and have his moderator privileges taken away for 6 months for this kind of disrespectful and hurtful behavior. I try my very best to research cases and 1's behavior and calling me a troll is extremely insensitive and just downright rude. I can't try harder than my best, because my best IS the best I can do. I don't know what he expects from me, but I feel as though he is pressuring me to give more than what I am able.

2 has also been extremely hurtful to me in the private messaging. He posted some hurtful words to me publicly and then when I called him out on it, he erased them and acted like he didn't know what I was talking about. As a result, he made me look like a liar and a fool in front of the whole forum. And what's more is that expressed that he has no remorse for what he's done. He caused me a lot of serious emotional pain, and bringing up this subject to him, he doesn't seem to care. I think I deserve the bare minimum of a public apology from him. However, I will admit that he has left me alone after I asked him to, so I'll give him that.

Third, I believe someone on this forum is spying on me. I don't know who it is, but someone seems to bring up things I said here to my private social media accounts, and harasses me for them. I don't know who this person is. There are multiple accounts doing this, but I believe it is ran by one person. That's why I got rid of my profile picture, and changed my bio. There's a couple people whom I think it is, but I don't have any proof, so I don't want to accuse anyone without having hard evidence. There was even a YT channel of a person bashing and falsely accusing a member from this forum as well.

Last, I would totally agree with the poor conduct of the GRG that was stated up above by Seto2001. Something serious needs to be done to put this madness to bed. Cases should not be marked as validated, until they are 100% sure the case is correct. Like Januario Rubiano has an ID card from 1961 that shows his birthdate as 31 December 1908, but that's not enough to validate him.

Edit from Aquanaut: Removed names

@aquanaut I agree, people shouldn't go out of their way to cyberbully and harass a person online and go out of f their way to say terrible and mean messages to them just because the posts that they make on a forum isn't accurate or plausible. They should tone it down a bit.

Posted by: @aq

↑

In that case, I've got a few issues of own to raise.

I am not a moderator or admin, but I personally believe that both Coyote77 and Mendocino should have their moderator privileges taken away.

Coyote77 has been very rude to me in the private messaging. He accusing me of "trolling" the forum when I've done no such thing. He also called my research "dumb" and discouraged me from further researching the case of Januario Rubiano. Personally, I believe that this forum should be a safe space and bullying like this should not be tolerated. I think he should get 2 strikes and have his moderator privileges taken away for 6 months for this kind of disrespectful and hurtful behavior. I try my very best to research cases and Coyote77's behavior and calling me a troll is extremely insensitive and just downright rude. I can't try harder than my best, because my best IS the best I can do. I don't know what he expects from me, but I feel as though he is pressuring me to give more than what I am able.

Mendocino has also been extremely hurtful to me in the private messaging. He posted some hurtful words to me publicly and then when I called him out on it, he erased them and acted like he didn't know what I was talking about. As a result, he made me look like a liar and a fool in front of the whole forum. And what's more is that expressed that he has no remorse for what he's done. He caused me a lot of serious emotional pain, and bringing up this subject to him, he doesn't seem to care. I think I deserve the bare minimum of a public apology from him. However, I will admit that he has left me alone after I asked him to, so I'll give him that.

Third, I believe someone on this forum is spying on me. I don't know who it is, but someone seems to bring up things I said here to my private social media accounts, and harasses me for them. I don't know who this person is. There are multiple accounts doing this, but I believe it is ran by one person. That's why I got rid of my profile picture, and changed my bio. There's a couple people whom I think it is, but I don't have any proof, so I don't want to accuse anyone without having hard evidence. There was even a YT channel of a person bashing and falsely accusing a member from this forum as well.

Last, I would totally agree with the poor conduct of the GRG that was stated up above by Seto2001. Something serious needs to be done to put this madness to bed. Cases should not be marked as validated, until they are 100% sure the case is correct. Like Januario Rubiano has an ID card from 1961 that shows his birthdate as 31 December 1908, but that's not enough to validate him.

Although I'm sure your hurt is genuine, I strongly advise you not to make such a public post with these kinds of accusations. If you feel you were mistreated, the best way to act is to contact the Admin or any of the other moderators.

As for what you're saying with regard to these two members, I have personally not experienced them in any such way. I am not trying to diminish any of your feelings or what you've experienced, but are you sure that the way you're seeing this is truly what went down? This is the Internet, an online environment where you don't have people's body language to judge things by or to ask for immediate feedback when someone says or mentions anything. That makes all interpretations ambiguous and not necessarily true. If I were you, I wouldn't put too much weight on other people's words online, especially if you have never met them in person. I am quite certain no one here is "out there to get you." We all live our own personal lives in the real world, and the only times we meet it's online to share our passion for supercentenarians. Please put the context of some niche online forum into the right perspective here. 🙂 

@marco thank you Marco for your advice. I will say that I have contacted a couple of the admins, asking for help on how I should handle this situation. NONE of the admins I contacted replied back. This was months ago. I'm not sure what else to do. I have felt nothing but unseen by the admins in this situation. I didn't want it to resort to this, but the last thing I thought of to do was to say my message publicly, in hopes that I will get a genuine apology from the two I mentioned. A long time ago, I felt that some of my own actions were hurtful towards Jimmy and Seto, and made a public apology to both of them. I felt really bad about what I said, and thought the only way to settle this problem was to apologize to both publicly so they knew it was sincere. I hoped that 1 and 2 thought the same way, that's why I said it publicly. 

I understand the admins are busy. I don't know what's going on in their lives, but please just take 5 minutes to review my complaints. 

I also totally agree with your statement about how this is online and not in person. I cannot see their expressions, and I cannot hear their tone of voice. But either way, I felt hurt by all that happened. That's why I haven't felt so motivated to participate on the birthday projects. I admit, I do tend to get in this thought pattern of people being out to get me, and that's something I am working on. I don't know why, but my moods go very up and down. 

Aquanaut has been spreading false information regarding some cases. Yet he has been redundant about how that information is true. That is the reason of my treatment to him. For example, he claimed that he found a baptismal record of a Januario Rubiano from 1908, a marriage record, but that he didn’t confirmed it belonged to him, and documents from 1961 and beyond supporting his age. None of it it’s true. The didn’t found anything…the only thing is that in his reports, there’s an ID card from 1961 that is shown (which it isn’t rare for a Colombian case). That’s the only real document that it has been found. He even send me a screenshot of a baptismal of a supposed Januario from 1909 but with no surname. In reality, that record had surnames and the birthplace didn’t match at all…but he purposely cut those parts so I couldn’t see the whole info…thinking I wasn’t able to find the doc on FamilySearch. 

@coyote77 I never said that I found a baptismal record from Januario Rubiano. I said I found a "POSSIBLE" match and gave you a theory as to why. I've never spread false information. And I did not PURPOSELY cut those parts. There are demons that like to gangup on me, because they know I am not a professional researcher, but in reality the whole time I have been the victim.

@AQ If you are bullied, please contact me. Thanks.