User talk:Etcetc

Regarding your edit on the "anarchism without adjectives" page, while I don't necessarily disagree, with your edit, could you please give explanation on the talk page. Looking at what you removed, it doesn't seem that bad. If this is a fight coming in from another article (which I doubt 'cause this is your first edit) then please state that. You can respond either here or on my talk page. And if I don't sign this, the stupid bot will leave another message telling me so. AFA http://revleft.com

hey

Hey, I just wanted to say that I appreciate your attempts to correct POV on various anarchism-related articles, and I think you're doing a good job of it. :) If you have time, could you also have a look at Anarchism_and_anarcho-capitalism? There's various bits of POV floating around like "ancapism is a form of ind-anarchism" when I had a look at it, but I'm not sure how to correct all of them. -- infinity0 17:36, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you too :) but careful not to get dragged into this site too much. :) -- infinity0 16:48, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hah i remember

Welcome back. i do keep an eye out for folk. infinty and others are obviously still chirpy! -- maxrspct ping me 22:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent comments

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Your comments at Talk:Anarcho-capitalism are inappropriate for a Wikipedia talk page. I would strongly encourage you to remove your own comments from that page. If you feel someone may be a sockpuppet, you should report the issue at WP:SSP. However, you should not make accusations nor disparage other editors on an article talk page. Also, regardless of your suspicions about another user, you should not revert without comment and you're still required to follow the revert rules. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Vassyana 10:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You posted your accusations along with uncivil comments towards that editor. Please review WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA for what is considered unacceptable. Inappropriate behaviour by others is not an excuse to engage in inappropriate behaviour. You can have your accusations of sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry reviewed at WP:SSP. If the person is a problem editor you may wish to file a request for comment or seek sysop intervention. However, none of these options are a replacement for dispute resolution. Just because you're convinced someone else is violating the rules and mores of Wikipedia does not give you free reign to do so. Contrary to your assertion, that does not improve Wikipedia, but rather leads to edit wars and disruption to the wiki. Instead, I implore you to act in a civil fashion and use the appropriate venues for this dispute. I will again politely but strongly request you remove your comments from the article talk page. The venom is distinctly unhelpful to the editing climate. Vassyana 11:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will ask you to please reconsider your actions. What steps have you taken to resolve the issue? When have admins reviewed your concerns? I will be removing your comments from the article talk page. While I appreciate your good intentions, you should well know that sort of post is highly inappropriate. Please address the situation appropriately. Vassyana 11:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turning to disparaging comments against me will not improve the situation. I understand your frustration, however insults and attacks are simply not acceptable. Those questions should have made you reflect. If what you provided is the whole of what was done, you have not tried very hard to resolve the situation. You linked a couple checkuser cases which showed that Vision Thing was unrelated (by checkuser standards) to Billy Ego, and also bafflingly linked to the sockpuppets of Billy Ego category, which does not include Vision Thing. The only thing you linked that was directly relevant to my question was the AN/I post. A couple failed checkuser attempts to get VT associated with a banned account and a nearly year old single attempt to seek sysop attention on AN/I nearly a year ago don't add up to much of an effort to resolve the issue. If you want sockpuppet allegations investigated and considered, please post them to WP:SSP. If there are ongoing behaviour concerns with the editor report those kinds of concerns at WP:AN/I. Have you made any attempts to resolve the content disputes with VT through dispute resolution? I have faith in our various processes. However, in order for them to work, they have to be used. You have yet to exhaust the options openly available to you. Vassyana 12:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Continued incivility after warning. Canvassing sock/meatpuppet accusations.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Diffs: Incivility.[1][2] Canvassing.[3][4] Vassyana 16:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VT

FWIW, I would say, based on editing style and habits, that VT is not a Billy Ego sockpuppet. Libertatia 22:03, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

Request reason:

At no point was I made aware by Vassyana that talking to other editors on their personal talk pages and sharing evidence concerning my suspicions about a user was against wikipedia policy. Giving that as a reason for banning me without ever warning me or even supplying a link to the applicable policy, before or after the ban, is highly inappropriate. In addition, Vassyana never made clear to me where wikipedia policy indicates that an accusation of sockpuppetry constitutes a personal attack. He seems to think this is clearly supported by policy, but no such indication is given on either the NPA or CIVIL pages he referred to. I feel I should be made fully aware of policy before it is cited against me. Finally, Vassyana chose to ban me rather than make any formal requests for mediation or arbitration, and before VT had made any such requests, despite the fact that the NPA article clearly indicates that a dispute resolution process is in order first. Vassyana has classified my claims as disruptive personal attacks without making any distinction between non-disruptive and disruptive personal attacks, even though the NPA text clearly indicates that some personal attacks are non-disruptive and should be dealt with first and foremost through dispute resolution. If my personal attacks where of the disruptive variety, I should be informed as to how they are different than the non-disruptive type. For all of these reasons I consider my block to be highly unjust. I'm requesting an unblock simply to clear my name on this issue, I'd be happy to voluntarily cease to edit wikipedia for any given time if any admin was simply polite enough to ask. Etcetc 06:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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=At no point was I made aware by Vassyana that talking to other editors on their personal talk pages and sharing evidence concerning my suspicions about a user was against wikipedia policy.  Giving that as a reason for banning me without ever warning me or even supplying a link to the applicable policy, before or after the ban, is highly inappropriate.  In addition, Vassyana never made clear to me where wikipedia policy indicates that an accusation of sockpuppetry constitutes a personal attack.  He seems to think this is clearly supported by policy, but no such indication is given on either the NPA or CIVIL pages he referred to.  I feel I should be made fully aware of policy before it is cited against me.  Finally, Vassyana chose to ban me rather than make any formal requests for mediation or arbitration, and before VT had made any such requests, despite the fact that the NPA article clearly indicates that a dispute resolution process is in order first.  Vassyana has classified my claims as disruptive personal attacks without making any distinction between non-disruptive and disruptive personal attacks, even though the NPA text clearly indicates that some personal attacks are non-disruptive and should be dealt with first and foremost through dispute resolution.  If my personal attacks where of the disruptive variety, I should be informed as to how they are different than the non-disruptive type.  For all of these reasons I consider my block to be highly unjust.  I'm requesting an unblock simply to clear my name on this issue, I'd be happy to voluntarily cease to edit wikipedia for any given time if any admin was simply polite enough to ask.  [[User:Etcetc|Etcetc]] 06:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC) |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=At no point was I made aware by Vassyana that talking to other editors on their personal talk pages and sharing evidence concerning my suspicions about a user was against wikipedia policy.  Giving that as a reason for banning me without ever warning me or even supplying a link to the applicable policy, before or after the ban, is highly inappropriate.  In addition, Vassyana never made clear to me where wikipedia policy indicates that an accusation of sockpuppetry constitutes a personal attack.  He seems to think this is clearly supported by policy, but no such indication is given on either the NPA or CIVIL pages he referred to.  I feel I should be made fully aware of policy before it is cited against me.  Finally, Vassyana chose to ban me rather than make any formal requests for mediation or arbitration, and before VT had made any such requests, despite the fact that the NPA article clearly indicates that a dispute resolution process is in order first.  Vassyana has classified my claims as disruptive personal attacks without making any distinction between non-disruptive and disruptive personal attacks, even though the NPA text clearly indicates that some personal attacks are non-disruptive and should be dealt with first and foremost through dispute resolution.  If my personal attacks where of the disruptive variety, I should be informed as to how they are different than the non-disruptive type.  For all of these reasons I consider my block to be highly unjust.  I'm requesting an unblock simply to clear my name on this issue, I'd be happy to voluntarily cease to edit wikipedia for any given time if any admin was simply polite enough to ask.  [[User:Etcetc|Etcetc]] 06:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC) |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=At no point was I made aware by Vassyana that talking to other editors on their personal talk pages and sharing evidence concerning my suspicions about a user was against wikipedia policy.  Giving that as a reason for banning me without ever warning me or even supplying a link to the applicable policy, before or after the ban, is highly inappropriate.  In addition, Vassyana never made clear to me where wikipedia policy indicates that an accusation of sockpuppetry constitutes a personal attack.  He seems to think this is clearly supported by policy, but no such indication is given on either the NPA or CIVIL pages he referred to.  I feel I should be made fully aware of policy before it is cited against me.  Finally, Vassyana chose to ban me rather than make any formal requests for mediation or arbitration, and before VT had made any such requests, despite the fact that the NPA article clearly indicates that a dispute resolution process is in order first.  Vassyana has classified my claims as disruptive personal attacks without making any distinction between non-disruptive and disruptive personal attacks, even though the NPA text clearly indicates that some personal attacks are non-disruptive and should be dealt with first and foremost through dispute resolution.  If my personal attacks where of the disruptive variety, I should be informed as to how they are different than the non-disruptive type.  For all of these reasons I consider my block to be highly unjust.  I'm requesting an unblock simply to clear my name on this issue, I'd be happy to voluntarily cease to edit wikipedia for any given time if any admin was simply polite enough to ask.  [[User:Etcetc|Etcetc]] 06:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}