User talk:Lambmeat

Blocked indefinitely

You have been blocked indefinitely for a long pattern of blatantly and deliberately disruptive edits. In reviewing your contributions, it seems clear that you are trying to game the system by making apparently useful contributions alongside blatant vandalism such as these edits, among others noted in your talk page history. More information is available at the ANI discussion here. You may appeal this block with the {{unblock}} template, however do not remove this notice nor any declined unblock requests from this page while you are blocked. This guide may assist in drafting your appeal.

Administrators reviewing the block: While I will not contest a removal or reduction of this block, I do ask that you please contact me to let me know you are doing so. I have this page watchlisted as well. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello

This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Lambmeat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock)

---

Request reason:

I ask that I be unblocked. I looked at the Administrator's Noticeboard/Incidents section about me and I understand your concerns about my behavior. I am a legit account, I was not trolling, I just got bored and did some bad things. I understand that what I did was totally egregious and unacceptable, even in small amounts, and I promise to return to legitimate contributions and never to do anything bad again. I am also definately not a sock. I spent time reading up on CSD, AIV, VAND, etc and that is why I know what I am doing. I ask that you please assume good faith and allow me a second chance. Thank you. Also, I do not go to Eleanor Roosevelt High School as my edits may suggest, someone else told me to do it (which I promise never to do again)

Decline reason:

Given your contribuition history this unblock request does not seem believable. Gwen Gale (talk) 23:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you abuse this procedure by making too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page as long as you are blocked.

"I was bored" and "Someone told me to" are horrible reasons for the sort of vandalism you did. Why should we trust you when you've already blatantly lied in your edit summaries? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Again, I understand what I did was unexcusable. However I assure you my future contributions will wash over what I did in the past. Lambmeat (talk) 22:08, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Not the first time you've pulled this. I'm hardblocking your IPs. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Lambmeat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock)

---

Request reason:

I don't understand, why do you say this seems unlikely? I just want another chance, surely it wouldn't do much harm. And why do you say this isn't the first time I have "done this"? I use a relatively large wi-fi network

Decline reason:

Another chance? No. —Travis^talk 01:34, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you abuse this procedure by making too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page as long as you are blocked.

Why not? It doesn't seem like you thought about it. And my question hasn't been answered, why is this "not the first time i have pulled this" Lambmeat (talk) 01:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

This blocked user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Lambmeat (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock)

---

Request reason:

Can you at least reduce the block? I do believe I deserve a block but I want to be able to make productive contributions again. And you can block me permenantly if I do something wrong again Also, I notice there wasn't really consensus for the block at the AN/I post

Decline reason:

Tell you what. Stay off of Wikipedia for 1 year completely. After that, someone might be able to trust you. It's impossible now. If you make any more requests now, after so many declines, your talk page will probably be protected against you making more requests, which will effectively mean you will never be unblocked. Mangojuice^talk 02:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first and then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you abuse this procedure by making too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page as long as you are blocked.

"Indefinitely" doesn't mean forever but you've lost almost all trust here for now. As Mangojuice said, it's going to take a long time to get that back. Stay away, or you'll likely be banned, which is even worse than this. Gwen Gale (talk) 10:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)