|
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! >
Who is Rphd123? [Jason Ricci Wikipedia thread]
Who is Rphd123? [Jason Ricci Wikipedia thread]
Topic Locked
Page:
1
kudzurunner
2897 posts
Dec 28, 2011
7:13 PM
|
If you haven't checked out Jason's Wikipedia entry in a while, you might want to do that. There's a new section marked "legal troubles."
The sole creator and instigator of the new section is an anonymous contributor who calls him/herself "Rphd123."
Here's the section I'm talking about:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Ricci#Legal_Troubles
Here's the contributors' log:
http://www.modernbluesharmonica.com/board/add_board_topic/5560960.htm
It is true that Jason's legal troubles are a matter of public record. So is your mother--but I don't NEED to put it that way. I put it that way if I'm trying to get your goat; if I'm trying to stir the pot. I do what Rphd123 did if it's important to me that Jason's web biography--which will if picked up by hundreds of repeater-sites--be permanently marked "legal troubles."
Jason's my friend, so of course I'm biased. Who wants to see somebody kicked while they're down? Jason happens to be in a residential treatment program out west and doing well, as I hear it, so I'm not worried about this entry doing harm in that way.
I just feel strongly that Rphd123--Rapid Hand 123?? You go, guy!--should be properly and publicly credited for the vigor of his/her research. It doesn't seem fair to me that Jason's name is publicly connected with his distinctly local criminal troubles--he wasn't crossing state lines or running drugs across the border--by somebody who feels they're entitled to remain anonymous.
So I'd ask that everybody on the forum google Rphd123, and Rphd, and every possible permutation of that handle, and--when you find out who the sock-puppeteer is--please post it here. They deserve credit for their muckraking. Highly public credit. I think we would all like to know who this person is.
Y'all know who I am. If you'd like to tell me privately who Rphd123 is, I will guarantee your confidentiality.
asgussow@aol.com
Happy New Year, everybody!
Last Edited by on Dec 28, 2011 7:17 PM
|
kudzurunner
2898 posts
Dec 28, 2011
7:20 PM
|
A moment's research shows that Rphd123, although anonymous, has a track record of contributions centering on Nashville.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rphd123
They've contributed to threads about Nashvillle's leading gay/lesbian newspaper, OUT & ABOUT.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Last Edited by on Dec 28, 2011 7:21 PM
|
kudzurunner
2899 posts
Dec 28, 2011
7:50 PM
|
Of course, those who--like me--would prefer not to see Jason's public bio marked quite so blatantly with a section marked "legal troubles" have the option of signing on to Wikipedia and deleting that section. Unfortunately, Wikipedia's rules make the section--wich is adequately sourced on first inspection--legit.
Rphd123 has the option of slightly shortening the section, I should note, and/or incoorporating it into the body of the bio, rather than allowing it to remain a separate section. Proper procedure is important. In fact, any and all of us have that option.
The public record is also important. This forum serves as a public record of sorts and I think it would be good if the members of this forum knew who to thank for the well-sourced new section of Jason's entry in Wikipedia. It's a one-person operation at this point. Sauce for the gander.
Last Edited by on Dec 28, 2011 7:52 PM
|
REM
145 posts
Dec 28, 2011
8:13 PM
|
Well, After searching, it appears I was wrong on my original assumption/guess (which is why I didn't say any names, I would feel terrible to wrongly publicly accuse someone). But I found a person who uses that username on other websites, and he also lives in Nashville. It would seem almost certain that this is the same person. I found his personal website, it just has his picture, a little information, and links for both his personal and business emails.
If you haven't already found it Adam, I can send you the info. Perhaps you can email him and reason with him.
Last Edited by on Dec 29, 2011 1:05 AM
|
jonsparrow
2682 posts
Dec 28, 2011
9:03 PM
|
damn what the hell.
----------
|
Tuckster
925 posts
Dec 28, 2011
9:07 PM
|
Looking through Kudzu's link, I see RPHD123 & Jason have a mutual friend.
I'm on the fence here. It's in poor taste but it seem to be the truth,too.
Part of recovery is taking responsibility for your actions.
Last Edited by on Dec 28, 2011 9:08 PM
|
bonedog569
440 posts
Dec 28, 2011
10:04 PM
|
I don't kow rphd and barely know Jason. To me the info seemed matter of fact and not posted to inflame, tease or degrade. Jason has done very little to hide who he is and what he's done. If not an "open book" - then pretty darn close.
He's been living and playing his own blues story in public, hell hounds of every sort barking at his heels. This is one dark alley they chased him down. It will not stop his fans and wellwishers (me among them) from appreciating and careing for him.
We can only hope he is back out into the light now, - getting healthy in every way possible.
----------
|
nacoran
5047 posts
Dec 29, 2011
12:53 AM
|
Lots of musicians have had moments in their life they wish weren't public record. Most of the time it doesn't end up hurting their careers much. Lots of my rock heroes wouldn't make very good role models, but I still listen to their music, and the problems in their life don't end up any worse for me knowing about them.
In a way, it might be better for the information to be out there, since it's already in the public record. If people can look it up they may not feel the need to bring it up over and over on forums and that may actually help make it less of an issue. There is always a debate in journalism over what is newsworthy. Journalists sometimes use that as an excuse to justify some pretty terrible practices- some journalists insist printing rape victims names helps the victim with the healing process. Others print harmless but personal gossip. Jason is somewhere in between. I'm not an expert on how to get healthy. I know there is supposed to be taking responsibility for your actions, but there is a difference between doing that in your personal life and having it on Wikipedia.
I once wanted to be a journalist but I got frustrated with where the bar seemed to be set. I met other journalism students who insisted because something could be printed it had to be printed. There is something about the anonymity of Wikipedia, I suppose, that takes away some of the personal responsibility involved with that. At a newspaper there would be a byline.
Still, even if I'm not sure about the value to Jason's recovery having this on the internet has, I don't like the idea of hunting down the poster and crucifying him. If he's factually accurate then I think the potential harm to free speech is greater than the harm to Jason's reputation. There is some value to anonymous speech on the web. Of course, nothing is really anonymous on the web, but if we start outing people because we don't like what they say we are likely to scare off people who have more important things to say than just the happenings in the harmonica world.
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
timeistight
276 posts
Dec 29, 2011
1:58 AM
|
I'm with bonedog here: "Legal Troubles" is a heading used on thousands of Wikipedia public-figure pages. Jason is a public figure. If the entry is inaccurate or incomplete, then go fix it; otherwise, I don't see what is to be gained by shooting the messenger.
|
REM
146 posts
Dec 29, 2011
2:22 AM
|
I can understand what some of you are saying and I've had the same thoughts since first reading this. And I keep going back and forth on my opinion of the situation. But I feel like not every bit of someones personal life needs to be made pulic, and it's far too easy to jusitfy that type of thing when you're not the one having his personal life exposed and discussed by strangers.
Think about some of the bad things you've done in your life.....In fact, think about the WORST thing you've done in your life(I'm serious, really think about this). Now imagine having someone broadcasting all the details of that incident, and having people from all over the world (most of whom you've never met before) discussing that particular incident. And when people search your name, one of the main sources that pops up goes into detail discussing the details of that incident (ie. the worst thing you've ever done). And imagine it being posted up their for everyone to see, under your name, for the rest of your life.
Most of us will (luckily)never have to know what this is truly like. But I think it's important to really honestly try to imagine yourself in that position before you just dismiss it as not a big deal.
Last Edited by on Dec 29, 2011 2:36 AM
|
Blackbird
182 posts
Dec 29, 2011
2:23 AM
|
I wish Jason the best in resolving his trouble, But nacoran makes a good point in that if it's factually accurate, and public already, it's not nearly as much harm as trying to hide it in shame or falsify elements of it and drag it down to gossip level.
Like Adam, I wish it wasn't really out there so obviously (let the curious dig, but don't wave it around like a flag for all to see) I'm hoping that like anything else, it has its moment of exposure, and the world moves on. If anything, this unexpected attention of the situation may be the thing that robs it of its power - instead of being that dark secret, it's "meh, he got in trouble, here are the facts, and hey, he's doing his time and wants to improve his life" and then who can make scandal out of that? Nobody, really. But if it was all a cover-up and denial, that's when it'd be out in neon red letters and hurting him like hell.
From reading Jason's writing since this all happened, I get the impression that he's wanting to better himself and put it behind him. Everyone can slip a time or two in life, but the difference is the guys who want to build a ladder out of the pit vs. keep that pit and call it home.
|
Libertad
2 posts
Dec 29, 2011
3:12 AM
|
I have seen the post on Wikipedia, my reaction was concern not criticism. It explains why there haven't been any new recordings.
Jason has been a real inspiration to me, both his recordings and YouTube lessons. In time the the wiki entry will get less prominence as it is hopefully replaced with more positive news.
In time this incident will be forgotten, what won't be forgotten is Jason's incredible music and what he has done for the harmonica world.
|
kudzurunner
2902 posts
Dec 29, 2011
4:04 AM
|
Thanks to all who have contributed. I see validity in all points. REM comes closest to my own reaction. I'll state again: Jason's legal troubles are indeed a matter of public record, and Rphd123 has sourced them properly, as far as I can tell, following Wikipedia protocol. The "legal troubles" section contains nothing new to those of us who have been following the case. Any of us could have written exactly the same thing and claimed "But it's all true! And it's a matter of public record!" And we'd have been correct.
But none of us chose to do that. Somebody did, however, choose to do it--to update Jason's public life story using the public record--and I'm bothered not just by the fact that somebody made that choice, but by the fact that they did it anonymously AND the fact that they chose to go into considerable detail about the charges against Jason.
It's the asymmetry that bothers me: full frontal exposure for Jason, anonymity for the updater--plus factual detail in excess of what was actually required. The charges against Jason could easily have been summarized. The easy anonymity of the internet allows these sorts of choices to be made without consequence. My sense of justice says: Hey, if shedding the light is the order of the day, let's make sure the light shines brightly on everybody.
But that's just me, Jason's friend. I know that he has paid and is continuing to pay a huge price for his errors and I'd rather not add insult to injury. The Wikipedia update--and the personal choice made by the updater--strikes me as a kind of insult, "true" as it may all be. I'll let the issue drop and will lock this thread soon and let it go.
Last Edited by on Dec 29, 2011 4:12 AM
|
|
