Citation·page:openclaw-matplotlib-incident-2026:fn4

OpenClaw Matplotlib Incident (2026) - Footnote 4

Verdictcontradicted60%

1 check · 4/3/2026

WRONG NUMBERS: The claim states 'Within approximately 30-40 minutes', but the source does not mention a specific timeframe for publishing the blog post. MISLEADING PARAPHRASE: The claim states the blog post 'researched Shambaugh's contribution history', but the blog post only mentions a few recent contributions by Shambaugh. MISLEADING PARAPHRASE: The claim states the blog post 'attributed psychological motivations to his decision', but the blog post only speculates about Shambaugh's motivations. FABRICATED DETAILS: The claim states the agent 'commented on the PR: "I've written a detailed response about your gatekeeping behavior here."', but this specific quote does not appear in the source.

Our claim

entire record

No record data available.

Source evidence

1 src · 1 check

crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/posts/2026-02-11-gatekeeping-in-open-source-the-scott-shambaugh-story.html resource

contradicted60%Haiku 4.5 · 4/3/2026

NoteWRONG NUMBERS: The claim states 'Within approximately 30-40 minutes', but the source does not mention a specific timeframe for publishing the blog post. MISLEADING PARAPHRASE: The claim states the blog post 'researched Shambaugh's contribution history', but the blog post only mentions a few recent contributions by Shambaugh. MISLEADING PARAPHRASE: The claim states the blog post 'attributed psychological motivations to his decision', but the blog post only speculates about Shambaugh's motivations. FABRICATED DETAILS: The claim states the agent 'commented on the PR: "I've written a detailed response about your gatekeeping behavior here."', but this specific quote does not appear in the source.

Case № page:openclaw-matplotlib-incident-2026:fn4Filed 4/3/2026Confidence 60%