User talk:Sasha Callahan

This user has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. (see: block log • contributions • deleted contributions • page moves • current autoblocks)

Your posting to ANI

Sasha, what on earth is going on here? And why did you just post that message??? - Alison ^❤ 19:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the post on OWB as it contained a private email which he asked you to keep confidential. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:45, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

(ec) Ok - please stop posting that information around the place. It could be damaging to that person in RL. Put it this way, consider this a formal warning. This contains RL information about a person so I'm applying for oversight here. - Alison ^❤ 19:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I think this account has been compromised. As such it is blocked. It started posting other private info as well. —Wknight94 (talk) 19:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

(ec) Final warning. Any more of this and I'm blocking your account - Alison ^❤ 19:48, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually wknight94 has already blocked. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Checkuser indicates that the account is not compromised. I've called for oversight on those edits, BTW - Alison ^❤ 19:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, then what the hell? An imposter account of some kind? —Wknight94 (talk) 19:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, this is quite surprising. Does the checkuser data give us any possible leads to sockpuppetry or the like or was this just someone gone rouge? Wizardman 20:01, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Who has it in for Proabivouac (talk · contribs)? That name seems to come up from time to time but I don't know any specifics. I see a similar edit here. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser shows no other active socks right now, so the owner has likely gone rouge or something - Alison ^❤ 23:35, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Just clarifying -- the word isn't "rouge" but "rogue", which is what I assume you mean.

Equazcion •✗/C • 23:40, 12/24/2007

Well, yes. Indeed. Pardon my French ... - Alison ^❤ 00:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

This user was formerly known as User:Black Harry, later renamed to User:New England. "Sasha" claimed her friend used the account, then gave it to her, but she eventually chose to make her own. This explains why this account has it in for Oldwindybear, as Black Harry and Oldwindybear once got into a conflict. I originally kept this secret for her, as she wished for a new start and our policies and standards encourage people to make new starts. Suffice it to say that there are more tactful ways of handling the OWB situation on her part. Given that Sasha has shown no intent to co-operate with community standards on behaviour and felt the need to attempt to "out" other editors, I felt the need to inform everyone of her previous accounts. User:New England has been blocked accordingly. --Deskana (talk) 21:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to add my two cents. I don't know this user too well but have come across her (is it a her?) before. We've certainly disagreed on many things but I've never seen her blatantly ignore or go against policy... this seems very surprising to me. I hope she's still allowed to post to this page at least, so she has the opportunity to explain herself.

Equazcion •✗/C • 21:51, 12/24/2007

Yes, a blocked user can still edit his or her own talkpage (unless it's protected, which this one isn't). Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible for some of the posts that resulted in the block could be restored here, with the personal information censored out?

Equazcion •✗/C • 21:55, 12/24/2007

(ec) Well that means we have double voting 1 and 2, 1 and 2. I'll try to find a few more when I have time. I also found this edit where Sasha Callahan says a sock report I put together was not as compelling as one put together for "OldBear or whatever he called himself". She obviously knew exactly what he called himself and had been setting him up this whole time. —Wknight94 (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Okay. I was talking more about the deleted edits though, the ones that actually ended up triggering this block. I'm curious to see those (and I understand they may need censoring), even though the diffs above do seem pretty clearcut.

Equazcion •✗/C • 22:27, 12/24/2007

The diffs I show above are a result of Deskana's revelation that User:Sasha Callahan = User:New England and have nothing to do with the original block on User:Sasha Callahan. What got that account blocked was the posting of an unsubstantiated personal e-mail followed by a user page accusation (which had no relation to the e-mail that I am aware of). I would only be willing to give a copy of that e-mail to people awfully high up the food chain, i.e. arbitrators and such (and yes I did save a copy of the edit). —Wknight94 (talk) 22:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why they couldn't be posted with the email addresses removed, but okay. I'm not accusing anyone of anything but the reasons for a block should be, and are usually, plainly available for anyone to see.

Equazcion •✗/C • 22:58, 12/24/2007

She posted the contents of a private email on here (repeatedly) without permission, including reposting their email address, which was meant to be private. Posting private mail on here was deemed inappropriate by ArbCom during a recent case. She also 'outted' that person's new account on here, or at least she said she did. Either way, that person has now left Wikipedia as a result. Furthermore, she posted the apparent full name of another editor on here. I applied for (and was granted) oversight on all of those edits. None of this is good and each of these incidents could be blockable in and of itself - Alison ^❤ 23:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I understand and appreciate the reasoning. I just was hoping to see actual pastes or diffs of the material that resulted in the block, with the understanding that the personal info would need to be censored out.

Equazcion •✗/C • 23:48, 12/24/2007

I'd love to help, but they've gone now and I've no copies nor access to them. Were I to state the gist of them here, I'd end up outting another editor just as she did, so I'm not about to do that. I'm not sure what's to be gained from you knowing right now, but if you really need to, I suggest you request information either from ArbCom or from someone with Oversight privs - Alison ^❤ 00:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Alison is correct - there's no way to paraphrase or expunge the edits without repeating the betrayal - and I emphasize the last word. The block and oversights were proper and necessary. Acroterion _(talk) 00:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. Thanks.

Equazcion •✗/C • 00:37, 12/25/2007

Sasha - if that's your name - before you revert again, just remember - you didn't just betray OWB, you betrayed us all. Especially those of us who believed in you and trusted you. Oh well ... - Alison ^❤ 20:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Whatever guys, I'm done. I just ask that you delete everything in my userspace (including New Englands) Delete the userpages too, and redirect them to the talk pages, then protect them from trolls like Pananairjdde (talk · contribs). Sorry Alison, I just didn't feel like doing this anymore. I won't request an unblock, and it was pointless for you to block the IP, you could've at least given the real reason. And Deskana, you'll make a fine arbitrator. Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 01:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Nothing's going to be protected (except maybe this page) or deleted. Holding on to an old grudge for this long is pretty sad. Why don't you leave people alone who actually want to contribute to the encyclopedia instead of becoming one of the trolls that you refer to. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. I've done a bad thing and accept the punishment. Adios. Merry Christmas _{from Sasha} 02:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)