User talk:Ewalker33

Quick note

Your claim here about Firefly threatening you doesn't seem to be true; I'm not sure what part of their message made you think that was the case, but I doubt it was their intention. Additionally, you can't "forbid" someone to interact with you. You may be confusing that with another circumstance where you may request a user stay off your own talk page (and typically vice versa), but the only way a user is forbidden (by policy) to interact with another is through an interaction ban. These can only be imposed by the Arbitration Committee or by the Wikipedia community.

It would likely be more appropriate to just politely ask a user whom you wish not to interact with to not interact with you (and vice versa). Hopefully this helps clarify things. Perryprog (talk) 17:24, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Primefac (talk) 17:36, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Ewalker33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have been indefinitely blocked by someone I explicitly asked not to interact with me, as they were harassing me. They stated they would refrain from any future interactions, and then out of the blue blocked me indefinitely for nothing. I have not edited since I was blocked from editing drafts other than to participate in a discussion. They say I am not here to build an encyclopedia, but that is precisely what I'm trying to do by preventing drafts from being deleted. I have not been given a chance to do anything constructive, because this admin went against their word to block me out of the blue purely because they didn't like what I was doing. That is entirely unacceptable, and smacks of admins protecting their e-friends at the expense of new contributors. Ewalker33 (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Primefac said they would avoid non-admin contact with you. There AFAIK is no formal interaction ban in effect preventing them from any interaction whatsoever with you. I don't agree that gaming policies to make a point improves the encyclopedia, especially in draft space. I had some sympathy for you nevertheless until you tossed around the protective cabal accusation, which I find repugnant. I don't protect anyone, and I want everyone to participate within the bounds of guidelines. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 20:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

@Primefac: I recommend you undo the block before someone else reverses it for you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ewalker33 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What software were you using to undo all those deletion tags? SQL ^{Query me!} 18:16, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, pings don't work if you don't sign your posts. I'll help you out here. @Primefac:. SQL ^{Query me!} 18:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks SQL, I've got the page watchlisted from here. Primefac (talk) 18:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SQL: I wasn't removing any deletion tags. Ewalker33 (talk) 18:36, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry - I mis-spoke. Let's try again. What software were you using to rapidly do this? SQL ^{Query me!} 18:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave the unblock request for another admin, but you'll note that I said I would refrain from any non-admin interaction with you. When you immediately turn around and say a) you'll go right back to your disruptive editing after the block expires, and b) tell four users that you're "banning them" from interacting with you (on a discussion page!) it's clear you're not here to improve the encyclopedia (because that would involve actually having discussions with people). Primefac (talk) 18:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: - My point is that Primefac blocked me improperly. He was Wikipedia:INVOLVED. Blocks are supposed to be preventative, not punitive. I had stopped editing drafts and was discussing at the talk page about G13 being useless. How does blocking me INDEFINITELY prevent anything? It doesn't, it's purely punishment. I ask that the block be reconsidered as it is a flagrant violation of policy. Ewalker33 (talk) 13:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by my decline and I have nothing to add. You may make another unblock request, to be reviewed by a different administrator. If you convince them, they will unblock you, it's out of my hands now. 331dot (talk) 14:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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).

Ewalker33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

See above - I was blocked by someone INVOLVED, and who I had asked to stop interacting with me as per Wikipedia:Harassment. Their block was punitive, not preventative, and goes against policy - I had not made ANY edits between the original block and the indefinite block apart from contributing to a discussion.

Decline reason:

No, you're wrong on all counts. And you still haven't answered SQL's question about using an unauthorized bot. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Clearly, I will let someone else review the above, but a few points: I was not involved, I gave administrative warning that disruptively editing in the draft space would result in sanctions. I will hand in every tool I own if the conversation at WT:CSD is found to be harassment, because it's not. The initial block was for a short period to prevent disruption, and it became an indefinite block when it became clear that the disruption would continue after the block expired. The user had not made any edits except to WT:CSD after their pblock because they have expressed no interest in editing anywhere except the Draft space (disruptively, I might add). Primefac (talk) 14:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SQL: @NinjaRobotPirate: - I was clicking very fast, and you can't prove otherwise. (ʘ‿ʘ✿) Clearly you bunch of incestuous power trippers aren't going to do anything, so I will. Ewalker33 (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@NinjaRobotPirate: - so you blocked my IP as a webhost? I find it very interesting that it was blocked only yesterday. Did you, or @Primefac: by any chance run a fishing-trip Checkuser on me just to find out my IP? Oh dear. That's not good for you is it? Ewalker33 (talk) 14:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]