User talk:24.42.221.147

This 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).

24.42.221.147 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was blocked for Block Evasion, however while yes I am anonymous (which is in no way a violation of wikipedia rules). This is my home IP, and this block was baseless and I'm guessing a spiteful abuse of admin tools to block me for my disagreement with the block of another user. I request this block be lifted and would not mind the admin responsible for the block to be tutored on correct usage of his admin tools.

Decline reason:

Read WP:DUCK and WP:MEAT. Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:49, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

24.42.221.147 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I first of all take rather great offense to the suggestion of meat puppetry, while I came aware of this dispute from some discussion about it elsewhere, by no means was I asked to take part in it, nor did anyone know until after the lock was enacted on the block discussion that I'd posted there. Meat puppetry clearly asserts that recruitment of persons partaking in the discussion of the user has occurred. This is false and I feel clearly ignoring the necessity of assuming good faith. Second, I'm not fully understanding the suggestion of WP:DUCK, If me, being an IP user who happened across this case and felt it worth my time and effort to take part in the discussion on this wiki, is all it takes for me to be "obviously a sock puppet" via the duck test, then perhaps it is less me who ought read WP:DUCK and rather you, as I don't think you fully understand the implications and intent of WP:DUCK, as I meet zero of the qualifiers. So, again I request an unblock as well as for you to stop trying to make rules fit my case rather than finding rules that DO fit my case. This isn't a very free and open wiki, and I've never violated any of the rules herein.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I first of all take rather great offense to the suggestion of meat puppetry, while I came aware of this dispute from some discussion about it elsewhere, by no means was I asked to take part in it, nor did anyone know until after the lock was enacted on the block discussion that I'd posted there. Meat puppetry clearly asserts that recruitment of persons partaking in the discussion of the user has occurred. This is false and I feel clearly ignoring the necessity of [[Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith|assuming good faith]]. Second, I'm not fully understanding the suggestion of [[WP:DUCK]], If me, being an IP user who happened across this case and felt it worth my time and effort to take part in the discussion on this wiki, is all it takes for me to be "obviously a sock puppet" via the duck test, then perhaps it is less me who ought read WP:DUCK and rather you, as I don't think you fully understand the implications and intent of WP:DUCK, as I meet zero of the qualifiers. So, again I request an unblock as well as for you to stop trying to make rules fit my case rather than finding rules that DO fit my case. This isn't a very free and open wiki, and I've never violated any of the rules herein. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I first of all take rather great offense to the suggestion of meat puppetry, while I came aware of this dispute from some discussion about it elsewhere, by no means was I asked to take part in it, nor did anyone know until after the lock was enacted on the block discussion that I'd posted there. Meat puppetry clearly asserts that recruitment of persons partaking in the discussion of the user has occurred. This is false and I feel clearly ignoring the necessity of [[Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith|assuming good faith]]. Second, I'm not fully understanding the suggestion of [[WP:DUCK]], If me, being an IP user who happened across this case and felt it worth my time and effort to take part in the discussion on this wiki, is all it takes for me to be "obviously a sock puppet" via the duck test, then perhaps it is less me who ought read WP:DUCK and rather you, as I don't think you fully understand the implications and intent of WP:DUCK, as I meet zero of the qualifiers. So, again I request an unblock as well as for you to stop trying to make rules fit my case rather than finding rules that DO fit my case. This isn't a very free and open wiki, and I've never violated any of the rules herein. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I first of all take rather great offense to the suggestion of meat puppetry, while I came aware of this dispute from some discussion about it elsewhere, by no means was I asked to take part in it, nor did anyone know until after the lock was enacted on the block discussion that I'd posted there. Meat puppetry clearly asserts that recruitment of persons partaking in the discussion of the user has occurred. This is false and I feel clearly ignoring the necessity of [[Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith|assuming good faith]]. Second, I'm not fully understanding the suggestion of [[WP:DUCK]], If me, being an IP user who happened across this case and felt it worth my time and effort to take part in the discussion on this wiki, is all it takes for me to be "obviously a sock puppet" via the duck test, then perhaps it is less me who ought read WP:DUCK and rather you, as I don't think you fully understand the implications and intent of WP:DUCK, as I meet zero of the qualifiers. So, again I request an unblock as well as for you to stop trying to make rules fit my case rather than finding rules that DO fit my case. This isn't a very free and open wiki, and I've never violated any of the rules herein. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}