This visualization is dramatic.  It only goes to the end of September when cases were dropping.  Since we are in another wave, methinks the red curve is rising again.

Dustin McDaniel and Racing Commission

On March 9, 2021, Gulfside Casino Partnership filed for judicial review of a decision by the Arkansas Racing Commission that Legends Resort and Casino, LLC, was a qualified casino applicant.

With all the cases I was watching, I missed looking closely at one of them.  Nothing had happened in it since August and the main event in all the litigation was the case that went to the Arkansas Supreme Court,  60-CV-19-5832, Gulfside  Casino Partnership v. Arkansas Department of Finance.

The new case, 60-CV-21-1653, asks for a judicial review of the Racing Commission’s finding that Legends demonstrated experience conducting casino gaming.  Gulfside claims it was injured by the Racing Commission’s decision, as Legends seeks to take away Gulfside’s casino gaming license, even though Legends fails to meet a minimum requirement imposed by Amendment 100.  (Interestingly, the license wasn’t actually awarded to Gulfside until the end of July.)

On October 21, 2021, in Gulfside  Casino Partnership v. Arkansas Department of Finance, 60-CV-19-5832, the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed and dismissed Judge Tim Fox’s order of May 7, 2021.  In that order, Judge Fox determined that a portion of a casino gaming rule and that part of an Arkansas law were unconstitutional.  Both of these stipulate that required local documents expressing support for the application be from current local officeholders. Gulfside’s support documents came from previous officeholders.  If Judge Fox’s order was upheld, then those documents would be valid.  Since the Supreme Court reversed and dismissed the case, Gulfside’s support documents are invalid as is their license.

Gulfside had 18 calendar days to file a petition for a rehearing. The end of that period was end-of-day on 11/8/2021.  They did not file a petition for a rehearing.  That afternoon they did, however, file new motions in 60-CV-21-1653 regarding their allegations of Legends’ lack of experience in casino gaming.

On the morning of 11/9/2021, the Arkansas Supreme Court issued a mandate, making the decision final, with the mandate to be mailed to Judge Fox’s court.

The only remaining litigation for Gulfside is 60-CV-21-1653.

The Racing Commission, per the Casino Gaming Rules, had accepted Legends as a qualified applicant at least twice before this litigation (request for judicial review) was filed.

After the litigation was filed, on July 30, 2020, a hearing  was held “In the Matter of Gulfside Casino Partnership Request for Determination Regarding Legend Resort and Casino LLC Applicant Status Under Amendment 100.”  The following partial transcript is from that hearing:

MR. MCDANIEL: Then in August we resubmitted again, under the name of CNB. And then in September there was a back-and-forth between Mr. Freeland, with whom I have spoken a couple of times this week, and I have been very clear to say, Mr. Freeland, if I cite our conversations, would it be fair to say this, or fair to say that?

He’s here, so if I in any way unfairly cite our conversations, I’m sure he will correct me.

But at the time there was a discussion among the Commission, the Chair, especially, and counsel, Mr. Freeland, about sovereign immunity of Quapaw Nation and Cherokee Nation, as applicants, and also the Choctaw Nation, which was, had an application in the mix somewhere.

And so there were sovereign immunity waivers that circulated back and forth between the lawyers at that time, and apparently the decision was made that the comfort level of the Commission and of all of the lawyers involved would be for the Quapaw Nation to transfer their license to a newly formed LLC called Saracen Resort, LLC.

They created that pursuant to your rules. They came in front of you. Saracen Resort, LLC is just like Legends. It’s a brand new formed Arkansas LLC. And the determination was made by your counsel and yourselves that it qualified, met every qualification, and you transferred the license over to Saracen.

Subsequent to conversations with that, the question arose, Well, do you want us to do that on our application as well, and the answer was, Yeah, that would be appropriate.

So we formed a new LLC that would be purely an Arkansas holding LLC, no risk of sovereign immunity issues popping up at anytime in the future, and we resubmitted our application not in January, but rather in November, November the 15th. And then it was resubmitted again in January.

So it was done purely in cooperation with and coordination with this, this Commission and your counsel. I would submit that the law is rather clear, that no LLC in and of itself has experience. Procurement law is guiding in this.

Whether it is federal contracting, construction, or mortgage lenders, or any other licensed entity, it is clear that you can’t just start a CPA LLC and say, I’m now a CPA because I have an accounting LLC. You have to have an accountant that has experience who manages that LLC, and then that’s where you get the experience.

So you have twice considered whether or not we demonstrate, according to the constitution, “demonstrate” means have. No part of the constitution redefines “demonstrate” or “have.” It doesn’t redefine any of our corporate law or modify any of our corporate law.

You have twice said that there is good cause to accept the CNB Legends LLC application, and that wouldn’t have happened if your counsel and you had not determined we qualified as applicants.

So I appreciate Mr. Castleberry making a record on this. I’m sure that we will all hear about it again later in our lives, but for today, I am certainly happy to answer any of your questions, but I would ask that you affirm your previous findings, that Legends LLC is a qualified applicant.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Thank you, Mr. McDaniel. Questions, comments from the Commissioners for Mr. McDaniel?

Mr. McDaniel, the principals for Legends, Cherokee Entertainment, CNB are they the same?

MR. MCDANIEL: All the exact same, yes, sir. Each one of them were provided to you in our application. There are background checks photographs, thumbprints, curriculum vitae, experience level. Legends Resort, LLC has no executives.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Mr. Hunter?

COMMISSIONER HUNTER: Yes, sir. You mentioned the sovereign immunity question. Are there any other reasons, or is that one simple, one simple reason for the change?

MR. MCDANIEL: I was not involved, Mr. Hunter, in the discussion between Mr. Lieblong, Mr. Freeland, and the Quapaw, no I don’t really know what initiated that thinking at the time. But once it had been decided and determined, Hey, that’s how we want them to do it, we, we certainly had no objections. There is no corporate reason in the world not to have a holding company in any given state where you have a license, so we were perfectly happy to do it.

COMMISSIONER HUNTER: Thank you.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Did the LLC created for Saracen — and this may be a question for Mr. Bowen or Mr. Freeland — did the, did the LLC for Saracen come before or after they had been given a license?

MR. MCDANIEL. It was after. I can answer that. They were, they were given a license, I believe, in May, and then it was transferred, but the requirements for licensure and transfer are the same.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: So the Saracen LLC was created after that, after the license was awarded?

MR. BOWEN: I’m looking back at former counsel, who is — this was a little bit before our time, before I think the Attorney General’s office came in, and it’s my understanding that it was created after.

MR. FREELAND: That Is a correct statement.

MR. BOWEN: Okay.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Any further questions or comments for Mr. McDaniel? Hearing none, what is the pleasure of the Commission? Do I have a motion?

COMMISSIONER HUNTER: I move that we affirm the finding that Legends Resort and Casino is a qualified casino applicant.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: A motion has been made by Mr. Hunter. Do I have a second?

COMMISSIONER LANDERS: Second.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Second by Mr. Landers. Any further discussion? All in favor say “Aye.”

COMMISSIONERS: Aye.

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Opposed?

(No audible response.)

VICE CHAIRMAN LAMBERTH: Motion carries. Thank you.

Conclusions Of Law — February 2, 2021

• Amendment 100 requires that an applicant “demonstrate” experience in casino gaming. The sole owner and manager of Legends — CNB — operates ten (10) casinos in Oklahoma through its wholly owned subsidiary CNE.
• The business structure adopted by CNB/Legends is expressly authorized by the Casino Gaming Rules (see Casino Gaming Rule 15) and Amendment 100.
• CNB/Legends is a qualified applicant based on the knowledge, experience and expertise of any corporation or LLC is derived from its owners, members, managers, and executives.
• For these reasons, the ARC finds that Legends has demonstrated casino gaming experience as required by Amendment 100, § 4(m) and therefore is a qualified applicant.

Other things I’ve found

The counsel for the Racing Commission, who is the defendant in the case, is the Attorney General’s office. They have already said in previous filings in the case:

• Gulfside lacks standing under the Administrative Procedures Act
• Gulfside fails to allege, as is required, a “proper” injury.
• The Court (Fox) lacks subject matter jurisdiction
• The Racing Commission is entitled to sovereign immunity (you can’t sue the state except as specifically allowed by law)

CNB has said in previous filings in the case:

• Gulfside lacks standing because it is not a qualified applicant
• The resolution of Gulfside’s claim does nothing to change its current condition.
• Gulfside cannot show an immediate concrete injury that will be redressed by the relief question

At this point, as a former applicant, Gulfside has no current legal interest in the casino gaming license. As Dustin McDaniel has written, “Gulfside has no standing to challenge the qualification of any entity applying for a casino gaming license.”

Dear Pope County Quorum Court JPs,

It appears that some of you may misunderstand the provisions of Amendment 100, the Arkansas Casino Gaming Rules, and the Economic Development Agreement (EDA) between Pope County and Cherokee Nation Businesses.  I hope that you read this and give it your full attention, though I suspect that some will not.  I have published this on my blog and shared it elsewhere as an open letter to the Quorum Court.

Last Thursday, the quorum court passed a resolution that included,

Whereas, by rescinding his letter of support for the sole remaining applicant, Judge Cross has the power to end current litigation and offer conclusion to the embarrassing process that has plagued Pope County and its citizens for the past three years;

Now therefore, be it resolved by the Quorum Court of Pope County that Judge Cross should immediately rescind his letter of support for Legends Resort and Casino, LCC

In 2020, Judge Cross’s letter of support was submitted to the Racing Commission as part of a casino application from Cherokee Nation Businesses (CNB) and Legends Resort & Casino, LLC.  That application was accepted on April 15, 2020, for “good cause shown.” The application process was closed by the Racing Commission on July 21, 2020.

Judge Cross could write a letter to the Racing Commission rescinding his letter of support.  However, it would be a futile effort.  The judge’s letter of support is part of an application that has been accepted.  To rescind that letter, that application would have to be amended.  Judge Cross rescinding the letter would not change the application and would have no impact on current litigation, most of which is moot and will end soon because of the Supreme Court ruling.

Neither CNB nor the Racing Commission will be likely to want to amend the application.  CNB would certainly oppose such a move.

There is nothing in the Casino Gaming Rules that provides for amending, revising, or changing applications that have been submitted by the applicant nor for those that have been accepted by the Racing Commission.  Amending, revising, or changing an already accepted application would require a rule change, a process that I doubt the Racing Commission has any motivation to pursue.

Whether or not Judge Cross rescinds his letter – and we already know he will not – the resolution was futile and moot from the onset because it would not bear the fruit that was desired.  We all knew he would not rescind the letter before the resolution was even brought up in the meeting and, even if he did, it would have no impact on an already accepted license application.

On October 21, 2021, Cherokee Nation Businesses CEO, Chuck Garrett, said, “We also look forward to delivering on the $38.8M Economic Development Agreement executed with Pope County, which will allow communities to invest in police, fire, and other infrastructure projects while the casino resort is under development.”

In an email response to a county resident, one  JP referred to one part of the EDA and wrote, “A license was issued.  It looks like the EDA is null at this point.”

The part of the EDA that was referred to is “6.3 – Termination.” One of the occurrences it cites as grounds of termination is a license being awarded to someone else. That section also says, “…, this Agreement shall terminate upon the occurrence of any of the following, and upon notification of such occurrence by Operator to County.” The operator, of course, is CNB, who has never viewed the Gulfside license as valid and who has always intended to honor their commitments to Pope County in the EDA and otherwise.  CNB, obviously, has not notified the county of the issuance of a license to Gulfside nor have they used that license as grounds  to “get out of the EDA.” They have higher standards than that.

Without a support document from Judge Cross and, earlier, the resolution from the quorum court, CNB would not have been in a position to appeal the first Gulfside judgments in Judge Tim Fox’s court on March 24, 2020.  Since the Racing Commission did not appeal that case and they didn’t care about a local county ordinance (2018-O-42), Gulfside would have been issued a license in late Spring 2020.  The construction of the first phase of their casino would probably be nearing completion.

If Judge Cross were to rescind his letter, it would have zero impact on the status of the pending issuance of a casino license to Legends Resort and Casino Arkansas, LLC and Cherokee Nation Businesses. It would, however, likely constitute a breach of contract, abrogating the county’s contractual obligations under the EDA.  It could expose the county to litigation from CNB, while CNB would have the casino license and could build the casino without having to honor the commitments of the EDA.  That would result in a hostile environment between CNB and local officials that no one should welcome, though I recognize some would.

We keep getting reminded that the people of Pope County are against the casino.  Ironically, I have had few conversations with anyone adamantly against the casino.  I have talked to more people who are in favor of Legends Resort & Casino Arkansas.  I have also talked to a number of people who voted against the amendment in 2018, some because we were not given a choice about being one of the four locations, but who are now for the casino.

Ordinance 2018-O-42 passed by 68.07% to 37.93% but was subsequently repealed by the quorum court and ruled unconstitutional the day after that repeal.  On the same day that the ordinance was passed, Amendment 100 was passed by a statewide vote of 54% to 46%.  Pope County voted against it 61% to 39%.  I believe I voted for both measures, though, like many, I certainly did not understand the measure for poorly written ordinance 2018-O-42.

That was a one-day legal snapshot of public opinion. Even though it is used so, that does NOT mean that the people of Pope County are against the casino today.  There have been several unofficial surveys and polls that indicate the opposite, though I, personally, place little faith in surveys and polls.

A poll on Sass & The Bear currently has 154 votes: 93 say Legends Casino (CNB); 35 voted  Hard pass. No casino;  No preference / Undecided got 21 votes; Gulfside got 5.

The reliance on a snapshot of a 2018 election is worse than most reliance on polls and surveys.  Today, that would be like relying on a poll from 2018 for a primary election in 2022.

I’m not a casino person. I’ve never been to a show in a casino. I drink rarely and haven’t been in a casino in over three years.  At that time we were in Las Vegas and stopped at one casino. We ate in the buffet, did some shopping and I lost $25 in the slots.  My actual interest in the casino is the positive impact it will have for our region.

I believe that the casino will be the catalyst for significant positive change for our area.  We will see new businesses, new opportunities, and new investments in the area.  As I said in a recent TV news interview, “We won’t be like Northwest Arkansas, but we also won’t be like the Pope County of today.”

For those who have read this far and considered what I have to say, thank you.

Mike Goad

(I am not a lawyer and what I have written here is my layman’s understanding of conditions and circumstances.)

Royalty-free images by Mike¹ — No. 163 of over 1200 images

Mormon Row, Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming, September 20, 2007

U.S. Trailer Camps (1943)

Across the length and breadth of America at war can be seen compact colonies of strange little cottages on wheels. These vehicles, each boasting all the comforts of home on a miniature scale, are known as trailers. A group or colony of them is a trailer camp. They are used to house workers in American war industries and other plants which have sprung up like giant mushrooms all over the United States. An owner, with his auto, which pulls his trailer, may journey 500 to 1,000 miles to join some trailer camp near the factory where he intends to work.¹

Image information from the Library of Congress

Title: Emergency caravan. To provide temporary housing for defense workers while more permanent quarters are being built for them, this caravan of trailers crosses Memorial Bridge, Washington, D.C., on its way to Wilmington North Carolina. Trailers are being used all over the United States to provide this type of emergency defense housing. This caravan of 50 is the first shipment of more than 2000 currently being constructed
Creator(s): Dixon, Royden, photographer
Related Names: United States. Office for Emergency Management.
Date Created/Published: 1941 Apr.
Medium: 1 negative : safety ; 4 x 5 inches or smaller.
Reproduction Number: LC-USE6-D-000564 (b&w film neg.)
Call Number: LC-USE6- D-000564 [P&P] LOT 3474 (corresponding photographic print)
Repository: Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA
Notes:
…..Actual size of negative is D (approximately 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 inches).
…..Title and other information from caption card.
…..Transfer; United States. Office of War Information. Overseas Picture Division. Washington Division; 1944.
…..More information about the FSA/OWI Collection is available at http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.fsaowi
…..Film copy on SIS roll 37, frame 435.

Library of Congress item permalink

A larger version of this image than what is available online at the Library of Congress is available on Wikimedia Commons

Mike’s notes:

Image restoration note – This image has been digitally adjusted for one or more of the following:
– fade correction,
– color, contrast, and/or saturation enhancement
– selected spot and/or scratch removal
– cropped for composition and/or to accentuate subject matter
– straighten image

Image restoration is the process of using digital restoration tools to create new digital versions of the images while also improving their quality and repairing damage.

1. Vorse, Mary Heaton. “U.S. Trailer Camps.” Office of War Information (OWI), 1943. https://exit78.com/defense-worker-trailer-camps/.

The Court Room, the round glass-enclosed wing of the Arkansas Justice Building in Little Rock, houses the Arkansas Supreme Court Chamber

It’s been just under three years since voters in Arkansas approved a constitutional amendment¹  that required the Arkansas Racing Commission issue licenses for casino gaming at Las Vegas style casinos in each of four counties. Three of those casinos are in operation with revenue streaming to their communities from the casino gaming revenue tax as well as sales and property taxes.  While a license for a casino has been issued for the fourth casino, which is to be in Pope County, disputes—including political—and litigation have prevented breaking ground and construction.

A ruling on a critical Pope County casino court case² was handed down today³ by the Arkansas Supreme Court, overturning Judge Tim Fox’s order⁴ of May 21, 2021, which, for the second time, ruled a portion of an Arkansas casino gaming rule and a portion of a state law were unconstitutional. Both required,

A letter of support from the county judge or a resolution of support from the quorum court, and from the mayor, if appropriate…, shall be dated and signed by the county judge, quorum court, or mayor holding office at the time of the submission of an application for a casino license.⁵

Several Racing Commission meetings were held after Fox’s ruling to determine which applicant would get the license.  Gulfside Casino Partnership had submitted a one-line letter of support with their application from former County Judge Jim Ed Gibson written just ten days before he retired at the end of December 2018. Legends Resort and Casino, Arkansas, Inc.—a subsidiary of Cherokee Nation Businesses (CNB)⁶—submitted a letter of support from County Judge Ben Cross, Gibson’s successor and current county judge.

The immediate impact of the ruling is that it invalidates the casino gaming license issued by the Arkansas Racing Commission on July 31, 2020⁷ to Gulfside.

There is nothing in the constitution or the Racing Commission’s Casino Gaming rules⁸ that specifically addresses a situation where the holder of a  casino license is disqualified through a court ruling.  However, Arkansas’ constitution states, “The Arkansas Racing Commission shall award a casino license to a casino applicant for a casino to be located in Pope County…”

• Legends versus Arkansas Racing Commission.⁹
• County Judge Ben Cross and Legends versus Arkansas Racing Commission.¹⁰
• Citizens for a Better Pope County (CFABPC) and James Knight versus Arkansas Racing Commission.¹¹

The first two cases were filed after the Racing Commission issued a casino license to Gulfside following a series of controversial meetings.  With Legends the only qualified candidate, the bases for those cases are moot and both cases should be dismissed.

In the third case,  the last docket activity was on July 30^th, 2020. Judge Griffen granted CNB’s motion to intervene on January 6^th, 2020 “for good cause shown”  and, on the same day, denied Gulfside’s motion to intervene.  On May 18^th, Gulfside again filed a motion to intervene.  This is the same case where Judge Griffen issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) on January 3^rd, 2020, prohibiting the Racing Commission from meeting on January 6, 2020 and/or awarding a casino gaming license and enjoining them from considering applications or issuing a license based on applications invited, submitted and/or awarded during the second application period. That TRO eventually lapsed, after being extended once for 30 days, without any further relevant orders from the court.

CFABPC continued to seek a new TRO as well as a preliminary injunction, and permanent injunction—all to prevent the Racing Commission from acting on any applications.

In an April 10^th, 2020, letter to the Racing Commission (defendant) counsel, CNB’s attorney, Dustin McDaniel, wrote,

At the (January 3^rd) hearing, Judge Griffin made quite clear that no part of his TRO extended to the ARC’s ability to consider any application submitted pursuant to the “good cause” provision. My partner, Mr. Richardson, asked the Court if it would be permissible to proceed pursuant not to the Second Application period but upon a showing of good cause for submitting an application. Judge Griffen articulately made his point, as Judge Griffen often does, so that it would not take an attorney to decipher when he said: “I double, triple dog dare anyone to point to a single word in my order that applies to the ‘good cause’ provisions in the Rules.”

James Knight, in an affidavit filed July 30^th, 2020, says, “Now that two (2) of the seven (7) Commissioners have either been declared to be biased in favor on one of the applicants or recused to avoid the appearance of bias and impropriety… the Casino Gaming Rules must be declared to be null and void (invalid and inapplicable) with respect to the applications before the Racing Commission for the casino license in Pope County.” and, “Because the Casino Gaming Rules should now been deemed to be null and void… the Racing Commission is in violation of Amendment 100 and can not be allowed to proceed to award the casino license in Pope County to any applicant unless and until the Racing Commission’s non-compliance with Amendment 100 is cured.”

Gulfside’s license was issued the next day.  There was no action from Judge Griffen.

Essentially, the attorneys for CFABPC and James Knight were trying to find some way to stop the Racing Commission from issuing a license.

Their efforts failed.  Gulfside was awarded a license.

There is no reason to expect that the attorneys for CFABPC and James Knight will fare any better in their litigation attempt now that the Supreme Court ruling has invalidated Gulfside’s license.

• CFABPC and Knight
  • haven’t shown immediate and irreparable harm,
  • don’t have standing in the case,
  • haven’t presented any issues or controversies that can be resolved in court,
  • as part of their pleading, are attempting to relitigate a FOIA case that has already been dismissed with prejudice by the circuit court and, on appeal, denied by the Supreme Court.
• Judge Griffen doesn’t have jurisdiction and
• the Racing Commission has sovereign immunity (except under limited conditions, the State can’t be sued).

Time will tell.

… and it will take time, but there is some light down the tunnel now.

1. “Amendment 100.” Accessed October 14, 2021. 2018 Casino Amendment.
2. Arkansas Supreme Court, CV-21-289, Cherokee Nation Businesses, L.L.C. and Arkansas Racing Commission v. Gulfside Casino Partnership, appeal of May 21, 2021, Circuit Court Order reversing the Arkansas Racing Commission’s (“ARC’s) decision rejecting Appellee Gulfside Casino Partnership’s (“Gulfside’s”) application for a casino license.
3. Anticipating the ruling and when it would be issued, this blog post was written in advance.
4. Pulaski County Sixth Division Circuit Court, 60CV-19-5832, Gulfside Casino Partnership vs. Arkansas Racing Commission; Cherokee Nation Businesses, LLC —Intervenor (Pursuant to mandate of the Arkansas Supreme Court), filed August 15, 2019.
5. “Arkansas Code Title 23. Public Utilities and Regulated Industries § 23-117-101.” Findlaw. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://codes.findlaw.com/ar/….
6. “About Legends.” Legends Resort & Casino. Accessed October 12, 2021. https://legendsarkansas.com/about/.
   • “Legends is a strategic consultant to Cherokee Nation Businesses with renowned expertise in creating unforgettable entertainment and hospitality experiences. Founded by the Dallas Cowboys and New York Yankees, Legends is the driver behind the success of marquee entertainment, sports and leisure brands worldwide.”
7. Brawner , Steve. “Pope County Casino Case Hinges on Meaning of ‘the’.” Talk Business & Politics, August 10, 2021. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://talkbusiness.net/….
8. Arkansas Racing Commission. “State of Arkansas Rules on Casino Gaming,” February 21, 2019. https://www.dfa.arkansas.gov/….
9. Legends Resort and Casino, LLC v. Arkansas Racing Commission and the individual commissioners in their official capacities, Administrative Appeal,  Judge Wendell Griffen, Pulaski County, 6th Circuit Court, 60CV-21-1217, filed February 16, 2021
10. Ben Cross in his official capacity as County Judge and on behalf of Pope County, Arkansas; and Legends Resort and Casino, LLC v. Arkansas Racing Commission and the individual commissioners in their official capacities, several judicial recusals ended in Judge Randy Wright of the 8th North Judicial Circuit being assigned to the 5th Judicial Circuit to hear this case.=, Pope County, 5th Circuit Court, 58CV-20-429, filed October 13, 2020
11. Citizens for a Better Pope County and James Knight v. Arkansas Racing Commission and the individual commissioners in their official capacities, Judge Wendell Griffen, Pulaski County, 6th Circuit Court, 60CV-19-9172, filed December 27, 2019.

Never, never, never respond in any way to unsolicited text messages from any source that you do not know.

• I’m not Karen; she’s my wife.
• Clicking on the link could download malware onto your phone or take you to a “survey” site whose sole purpose is to harvest the account credtials from your phone and/or your private information through the questions they ask.
• Replying STOP will just confirm your phone number, possibly for future robotext messages.
• We’re not subscribed to anything that sends us robotexts like this, so we shouldn’t need to unsubscribe.  They know that people find this annoying and just want it to go away.  It’s a hook to fish you into taking action that will confirm your number.

• Don’t respond. If you do, you’re telling the sender you’re a receptive target. Even replying STOP or UNSUBSCRIBE will show the spammer the number is active and it will get leaked or sold to databases that other hackers have access to.
• Protect your information. Legitimate companies won’t send you texts unless you’ve subscribed for text messaging. Even then, personal information such as ID numbers (social security number, medicare number, driver’s license number, etc.) or passwords should never be shared via text or voice on your device.
• Don’t click on links.  They can lead to spoof sites that look real but can steal information or data, run up your usage, or install malicious software on your device.
• Block the number.  It help’s cut off one of the sender’s lines of communication.
• Report it to your provider.  For most U.S. providers, messages sent to 7726 are shared with security providers to help prevent spam.
• Use a spam-blocking app—prevents annying robocalls and texts and adds another layer of data security.
  • apps for iPhone
  • apps for Android
• Review your phone bill if it is higher than expected.  Some scams can force your phone to call or text premium numbers that charge a fee.
• Check out your device’s built-in spam-blocking features. Note: Some may inadvertently block or filter legitimate calls or texts.
  • I had “Silence Unknown Caller” turned on.  I missed an important call because of it and wondered why a voice message wasn’t left.  It turned out my voice mailbox was full.

Scammers are con artists. The “confidence trick,” in this case is to send a text message that looks legitimate, exploiting the receiver’s credulity, compassion, and greed.

Scammers use a variety of ever-changing stories to rope in their “mark” (victim).  This is just one of them.

Royalty-free images by Mike¹ — No. 162 of over 1200 images

Along Gros Ventre Road on the east side of Jackson Hole,
Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming, September 20, 2007

Post Endnotes

1. I am sharing some of my public domain images in periodic blog posts.
2. “Jackson Hole.” Wikipedia, as edited October 10, 2021. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org/… Jackson Hole.
3. “The Establishment of Grand Teton National Park.” WyoHistory.org, November 14, 2014. Accessed October 14, 2021. https://www.wyohistory.org/….

Series Notes:

• This image is also shared as public domain on Pixabay, Flickr, and Pinterest.
• Images are being shared in the sequence they were accepted by Pixabay, a royalty-free image-sharing site.
• Only images specifically identified as such are public domain or creative commons on our pages.
• All other images are copyright protected by me, creative commons, or used under the provisions of fair use.

I use Wikipedia extensively and, when I use it for a blog post, I cite it religiously. Having noticed recently that almost every Wikipedia article I cite had been updated fairly recently, I’ve started citing the specific edit as it existed when I accessed the article.

Free knowledge for everyone.

Wikipedia is a “free content… online encyclopedia written and maintained by a community of volunteers through a model of open collaboration.” Since 2005, it has been the single most consulted online source of information on topics for which Wikipedia has an article. As with any encyclopedia, it should not be used as a primary source for research though many see it as a good starting point.

Anyone with internet access can write articles and make changes to Wikipedia articles except in limited cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism.  About 130,000 editors—from expert scholars to casual readers—regularly edit Wikipedia.  Their work tends to improve the quality and authority of individual articles and Wikipedia as a whole.

I have made a grand total of 90 edits over 57 pages since I registered as a user on September 17, 2004. The most recent edit was an edit to the page “Three Mile Island accident” made on October 9, 2021,¹ as I was composing this post. My first three were minor edits to the page “Three Mile Island accident” the same day I registered as a user.

At the time, the “Three Mile Island accident” page was only two years old and was actually not very extensive.  Printed out, it’s only about 3 full pages in length.²  The current version is close to seven times the size plus lengthy reference, bibliography, and external links sections.  The page has been edited 3,913 times by 2,096 contributors.  The two largest edits were on July 2, 2012, when all of the content was replaced by, “you have been trolled lol,” and a minute later when user Palosirkka (no longer active) reverted the edit back to the original content.

Most changes make Wikipedia more accurate, but that is not always the case.  Some edits, like the “you’ve been trolled” edit, are malicious.  Others are made as practical jokes or deliberately slant the content of a page.  Sometimes edits have been done to make the subject of a page appear more flattering or less flattering instead of being purely factual and objective.³

In some cases, Wikipedia pages have been written or edited by paid writers to promote products or make them more attractive, though this is strongly discouraged.  Wikipedia specialists are available for hire,⁴ though “anyone editing for pay must disclose who is paying them, who the client is, and any other relevant affiliation.”⁵

Some Wikipedia edits are out and out vandalism.

Wikipedia says “vandalism is editing the project in an intentionally disruptive or malicious manner. Vandalism includes any addition, removal, or modification that is intentionally humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, or degrading in any way.”⁶

The majority of vandalism on Wikipedia is reverted quickly. There are various ways in which the vandalism gets detected so it can be reverted:

• • • Bots: In some cases, the vandalism is automatically detected and reverted by a Wikipedia bot. The vandal is always warned with no human intervention.
    • Recent changes patrol: Wikipedia has a special page that lists all the most recent changes. Some editors will monitor these changes for possible vandalism.
    • Watchlists: Any registered user can watch a page that they have created or edited or that they otherwise have an interest in. This functionality also enables users to monitor a page for vandalism.
    • Incidental discovery: Any reader who comes across vandalism by chance can revert it. In 2008, it was reported that the rarity of such incidental discovery indicated the efficacy of the other methods of vandalism removal.

This post was started with the intention of exploring why so many Wikipedia articles seem to be edited so recently.  What I’ve found instead is that Wikipedia is continually improving and has robust authoring and editing policies.

Most of the edits of articles I’ve cited were minor grammar or punctuation edits. Some added new and/or updated information. One edit was the removal of a promotional, for-profit link. Another reverted two previous edits for unexplained removal content. One page was added to a Wikipedia category (found at the bottom of some pages).

1. In looking over the TMI Accident page, I noted it talked about an explosion in the containment structure just ten hours after the start of the accident.  Having taught and used information from the accident multiple times over my years as an instructor at a facility similar to the TMI plant,—including Severe Accident Management and Mitigating Core Damage—I knew that it was a hydrogen burn and not an explosion so I added information and citation on that.
2. All revisions of Wikipedia pages are readily available.
3. “You Can Revise, but You Can’t Hide: Why Wikipedia Edits Leave a Trail.” OpenLearn. The Open University, May 7, 2014. Accessed October 8, 2021. https://www.open.edu…
4. “27 Best Freelance Wikipedia Specialists for Hire in October 2021 – Upwork™.” Upwork. Accessed October 9, 2021. https://www.upwork.com/… freelancers/.
5. “Conflict of Interest.” Wikipedia, as edited October 2, 2021. Accessed October 9, 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org… Conflict_of_interest.
6. “Vandalism on Wikipedia.” Wikipedia, as edited October 2, 2021. Accessed October 8, 2021. https://en.wikipedia.org… Vandalism.