User talk:Mrlob

Thanks

I just wanted to thank you for working on and creating the pages Lone Horn and Touch the Clouds. I appreciate the interest you have in their cultures. Best regards, oncamera^(t) 15:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Oncamera, for adding just the painting that I've mentioned in the article. I've some trouble ith adding pictures, so again, thanks a lot!!! Mrlob 15:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		A Barnstar you truly deserved, Mrlob, for contributing a lot to my user portal!

Kermanshahi 15:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you a lot, Kermanshahi! the Honorable Mrlob 16:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

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

84.87.138.105 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Ayatollah Rhobijnie". The reason given for Ayatollah Rhobijnie's block is: "sosck puppetry to avoid a block".

Blocking administrator: Chrislk02 (talk • blocks)

Decline reason: Obvious sockpuppet of User:Kermanshahi -- Netsnipe ► 19:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here, consider this, it is to those who baneed me and blocked innocent people:

Well, I won't any longer denie, that I am Rhobijnie and Kashwialariski. But that makes me a sockpuppeteer, not a sockpuppet. I can't be Kermanshahi, because I registered as a user before he did. But I know him from school, so that is why I contrubutede to his user-age, and helped him build it up. My account is older than his. That makes it highly unlikely\impossible for me to be his sockpuppet; more likely it would be, for him to be mine. But Rhobijnie and Kashwialariski are mine, so that makes me a sockpuppeteer. Not a sockpuppeteer. Please, auto-unblock me, and personally block me again, someone. A sockpuppeteer shouldn't be banned, but temperily banned. And please, unblock that poor Kermanshahi; he hasn't got nothing to do with this; he is innocent. Please, consider this, and take my humble apologies. I'll accept, whatever you decide whats' best, even when it is not something I like much. But, please, don't let innocent people pay for my stupidity...

Per Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kermanshahi, your indefinite block has been reduced to 2 weeks as of today. If you are caught violating the Wikipedia:Sock puppetry policy again, you may find yourself indefinitely blocked from editing Wikipedia. We have zero tolerance for this abuse of trust in the community. If you want to become an administrator, you need to earn our trust through good contributions and active participation in the community, not by handing out barnstars and voting on WP:RFA amongst your friends -- we've seen it many times before and can recognize when someone's trying to deceive us a mile away. I hope you've learnt your lesson, because it'll take you some time and a lot of good article edits to repair your reputation and our trust. -- Netsnipe ► 13:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are right about that, Netsnipe! I'll try to do my best, restoring my reputation! Thanks, for unblocking me (after two weeks)!

Mrlob 16:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok now I have enough of it! you made a new sockpuppet account: MaoVerdonk, I know because I know you and I am not taking this, finally this sockpuppet buisiness is finished and now you are trying to bring it back! Making artickless: sockpuppets of Kermanshahi! Don't dear ever doing this again I am going to contact Netsnipe and I will get you banned for this and don't you ever edit my users page again. It aint my fault you got no stars and I know for a fact you got Ayatollah Rhobijnie and Kashwialariski banned for nothing. And oh yeah you're not honorable you never made anything so get that out of your sig! Kermanshahi 15:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

my very own defence

You are right about the signature; it is currently just;

the Honorable Mrlob 15:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And about the rest; I feel personally attacked by you: I have made some good articles and contributions. In case you didn't notice; I have been blocked for to weeks, and that is the reason why I am not currently making changes away from my own user-talk. I can't even stop you editing my very own user-page! Oh, and about those noobs; I don't mind, having them blocked!

But what about avvusing me of having sockpuppets? You made a page where in it sais that Kashwialariski si my sockpuppet. And you even changed it on his user page to sockpuppet of Kermanshahi plus you added this user is a sockpuppeteer to my users page and you added a link to that page of yours. I am trying to remove all things about that sockpuppet business from my page and well from anywhere because I don't want people to know about it and you're spreading it all over the place! Kermanshahi 06:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Extended Block

I have extended your block for the continuous use of sockpuppets. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Next sock of yours I find, I will indef block you, and any other socks I find. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, tell me; what did MaoVerdonk wrong? Did he do vandalism? No, he didn't. I was almost unblocked, and now, you ruined everything. Please, turn back, th extending of my block! This ain't fair.

the Honorable Mrlob 07:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use of sockpuppets to evade a block is not appropriate. I have found several "new" editors that have started editing pages in a similar manner to you, as well as editing userpages of your sockpuppets. This is very suspicious. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My angry answer!

I don't care if it it suspicious! I used to be kind of a active user; I've made two good articles, and a two months-block is just wáy to much! Editing user-pages of declared sockpuppets ain't a bad thing; those pages where good ones; everything was deleted when they where declared being sockpuppets. Still, the sockpuppet-icon excists. Nothing wrong with that, right? And than, I DIDN'T MADE AN ACCOUNT CALLED MAOVERDONK!

So, please, perform another checkuser on me and MaoVerdonk; I'll bet on it that we haven't got the same IP-adresses, and he can't even be made on my computer! Please, believe me; I'm not him! Why do you believe Kermanshahi? Is he such a good user, or what? Please, consider this,

the Honorable Mrlob 13:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got Ayatollah Rhobijnie and Kashwialariski banned for nothing, they where not your sockpuppets you just wanted to shorten your penalty and now they can never do anything on Wikipedia again. And MaoVerdonk is your sockpuppet and you denie that, and he hasn't got the same IP yeah but thats because you only do things with him at work. So when an innocent user is accused of being you sockpuppet you agree with it and ruin everything for him forever and when your sockpuppet is banned you do denie it. Kermanshahi 14:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, you have continued your disruptive behavior. I will not shorten the block. Please refrain from disruptive behavior, even if MaoVerdonk is not your sockpuppet, i have several others that I am fairly sure are you. You have been proven, through a checkuser, to use sockpuppets in an innapropriate manner. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider this:

Yes, that has been proven. But MaoVerdonk ain't my proven sockpuppet. No checkuser is perfored yet; nothing is certain. You simply lack the evidence for extending my block. I was blocked for two weeks, due my confession, instead of two months, so please, at least turn the duration of that block down. Please, shorten it. My block was shortened, and no you have changed it. Because; what happened now, for you to make my block even longer? Please, explain thát to me! And who, if I'm permitted to ask, are those several others that you're fairly sure of? And yes, you are right about that last thing of yours, about my use of sockpuppets in the PAST. But for that, I have been given a two-weeks block; within several days, it would be expired. Well whát, gives you the right to change that one into almost unbareable long block? Explain yourself. Tell me who my several other sockpuppets are, and show me what the evidence is, on which yo based your unfairly long blocking of me. Because, when you show me sockpuppets from who I've allready confessed their mine, and who are allready blocked; than you have't got one leg to stand on! Than you need to have me unblocked right away! So, please, tell my everything, explain me. I am currently very anxious to hear your (probably) very weak defence, on which you humble apologies should follow soon. And when your sockpuppets claims of mine, are based on things that Kermanshahi sais; than you can have him blocked, for giving false reportings of one-existing sockpuppets. So, please give your answer(s) soon...

the Honorable Mrlob 18:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My decision stands. The evidence of the suspected sock puppets is fairly strong. There is no need for a checkuser in this case. Even checkusers are not 100% accurate. The coinicidental edits to past sockpuppets of yours is more than enough to make the connection of something fishy. I will lower the block from 2 months and reset it to 3 weeks, however you get no apologies. There is something fishy about you and your friends, im not sure what it is, but what I am sure is that it does not add value to this project. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zabuzza is also a suspected sock puppet of yours. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

' Zabuzza is not. He is Kermanshahi's. Look at their contribs to each other.

Mrlob 19:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA I get it you want to get me blocked now because you are in trouble, if MaoVerdonk isn't your sockpuppet then why is one of your accounts on the dutch wikipedia called like that aswell? Why have I seen you edit with it? Why have you told me it was and edited with it in my precence? And Zabuzza my sockpuppet? now we see where you're going, lying again the same way as you got rhobijnie banned ha and Kashwialariski. We both know they are not your sockpuppets and they know it too you liar. Now if you would say: Zabuzza ain't my sockpuppet, OK, but saying he is mine only makes matters worst for you, why lie again. Now I tell you something homeboy: you ain't never gonna get me banned no matter how many lies you tell (wich I know will as always be quite a lot). Kermanshahi 21:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC) And a nother thing: I got no problems with you defending yourself (although we both know the story that you tell is not true), but accusing me! that prover you deserve any punishment you get, now concider that. Kermanshahi 21:04, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help Zabuzza, Kermanshahi!

Well, okay. Zabuzza ain't Kermanshahi's sockpuppet. But you, Kermanshahi, you know, he also ain't mine! You where with me and Mr. Supriatna when he made his account. You can aim he isn't mine nor your account. But we where on the same IP, at that moment, you know? And so was Blow. So at least, you could (should?) take it for him. Because he doesn't deserve it to be blocked. He simple doesnt. And you know that. And although the unblock-reason he mentioned, sounded prettyweak for an outsider; he was right, and you know that. So plaese, help him regaining his account again. Because it wasn't Zabuzza's fault, but it was Blowland's, altough he did his vandalism, under an IP-adress, even different from his house-IP adress. You know, you, me and Melano where both connected to one and the same network. So, as I said, explain the moderators about Zabuzza and MaoVerdonk. But when your angry (and I do get that, actually), and don't wanna help me; at least consider helping Zabuzza, right. Even if it might cause me or Blowland trouble. Think about it, my friend, just think about it...

Before I forget about it, Honorable Kermanshahi, will you accept my Humble Apologies? Because I truly mean sorry for the (many) lies I've told.

Mrlob 19:14, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]