User talk:Renamed user 9

you

Trolling IP comment removed Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:41, 29 March 2008 (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).

Renamed user 9 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please read here is some evidence that I have not been underhand... (Admins, check history to read the whole thing)

Decline reason:

Regardless of whether you think you were right or not, abusing multiple accounts in the manner you did is against policy and grounds for a block. A checkuser confirmed that you were doing this in Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Gregs the baker. This means that your IP addresses conclusively matched those of the other accounts. Your long reasoning addressed no reasons why you would stop this behavior, only justifying your reasoning for doing so, which we are not interested in when considering your unblock. Unless you can demonstrate that you know why what you did was against policy, and that you will not do it again, you are unlikely to be unblocked. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:41, 29 March 2008 (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.

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Renamed user 9 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hersfold, Ok so at least we have aknowledged my Crispyducks678 was an ironic response channel to a dynamic IP sock and was not underhand, be it I admitted I was a sock to Alison. Which shows openess.

Now please take in I was not completely informed at the time on sock puppetry. And though I knew it was wrong, be it my irony response to the IP was trying to show this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alison&diff=prev&oldid=199643368), I thought all admin would see what I was doing to a dynamic IP sock who has been plaguing and trolling the Geordie article using the same pattern of fallacies to take down perfectly connected citations for as long as I have been editing that article for the past 6months; I thought they would see my ironic response account and that I would not acknowledge him with my gregs the baker account. I thought they would see what I was doing. But I can see it from the admins side too: even if they admitted what I had done (which you say they haven't, which is fair enough) they might fear getting caught in a quagmire of perceptual spin from the troll.

Now I'll demonstrate why I now know what I done was against policy: I have read up on WP:SOCK, and I have informed myself so I know the rules of WP:SOCK. Before I begin I would like you to know I don't believe in sock puppetry, my crispyducks678 account was an ironic response to a sock troll, for a demonstration purpose to the sock i.e. showin the sock what he was doing.

My next socks were open socks (I've admitted them) that were 'protest socks' that come about as a consequence of me not knowing an appeals process to show my case, and the fact I was against an egg time on an article up for deletion, conveniently put up when I was gagged that I had a current interest in. I did not take any joy in them at all, I also disliked the fact that the 212+ sock IP could apply a convenient ad hominem of a sock and associate my account with his sock to suppress my say which would have elucidated his fallacies... But I felt I had been gagged and I chained myself with a placard to the wiki parliment if you like. If you look since I pulled the wrong wire, in the films they are always the red one connected on the timer, and I haven't socked since the egg timer ran out. I'm strongly against sock puppetry, that was what my ironic crispyducks678 was about.

- I have realised any ironic response sock might even promote the idea of sock puppetry, which is not what the project needs...

- I have read the rules on WP:SOCK

- I've learned it is not in my interest to demonstrate to a sock, what he is doing.

- I've never done sock puppetry (Though I did do an ironic sock, and, again, that lead to a banning with me through inexperience percieving no way to show my case in an egg timer which lead to protest socks trying to show whilst I was gagged the opportunistic fallacies and thus his blinding -to people who didn't know the subject like the brief readers from other countries- of the verification) and I will never do sock puppetry.

I'm a fair user who believes in reference material for people to research and verify to a degree, I believe that is a human right. Sockpuppetry is not in my interest, or wiki's interests.

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=[[User:Hersfold|'''''<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers</em><em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold</em>''''']], Ok so at least we have aknowledged my Crispyducks678 was an ironic response channel to a dynamic IP sock and was not underhand, be it I admitted I was a sock to Alison. Which shows openess. 

Now please take in I was not completely informed at the time on sock puppetry. And though I knew it was wrong, be it my irony response to the IP was trying to show this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alison&diff=prev&oldid=199643368), I thought all admin would see what I was doing to a dynamic IP sock who has been plaguing and trolling the Geordie article using the same pattern of fallacies to take down perfectly connected citations for as long as I have been editing that article for the past 6months; I thought they would see my ironic response account and that I would not acknowledge him with my gregs the baker account. I thought they would see what I was doing. But I can see it from the admins side too: even if they admitted what I had done (which you say they haven't, which is fair enough) they might fear getting caught in a quagmire of perceptual spin from the troll. 

Now I'll demonstrate why I now know what I done was against policy: I have read up on WP:SOCK, and I have informed myself so I know the rules of WP:SOCK. Before I begin I would like you to know I don't believe in sock puppetry, my crispyducks678 account was an ironic response to a sock troll, for a demonstration purpose to the sock i.e. showin the sock what he was doing. 

'''My next socks were open socks (I've admitted them) that were 'protest socks' that come about as a consequence of me not knowing an appeals process to show my case''', '''and the fact I was against an egg time on an article up for deletion, conveniently put up when I was gagged that I had a current interest in. I did not take any joy in them at all, I also disliked the fact that the 212+ sock IP could apply a convenient ad hominem of a sock and associate my account with his sock to suppress my say which would have elucidated his fallacies... But I felt I had been gagged and I chained myself with a placard to the wiki parliment if you like.''' '''If you look since I pulled the wrong wire, in the films they are always the red one connected on the timer, and I haven't socked since the egg timer ran out.''' '''I'm strongly against sock puppetry, that was what my ironic crispyducks678 was about.'''

- I have realised any ironic response sock might even promote the idea of sock puppetry, which is not what the project needs... 

- I have read the rules on WP:SOCK

- I've learned it is not in my interest to demonstrate to a sock, what he is doing. 

- I've never done sock puppetry (Though I did do an ironic sock, and, again, that lead to a banning with me through inexperience percieving no way to show my case in an egg timer which lead to protest socks trying to show whilst I was gagged the opportunistic fallacies and thus his blinding -to people who didn't know the subject like the brief readers from other countries- of the verification) and I will never do sock puppetry.

I'm a fair user who believes in reference material for people to research and verify to a degree, I believe that is a human right. Sockpuppetry is not in my interest, or wiki's interests. |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=[[User:Hersfold|'''''<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers</em><em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold</em>''''']], Ok so at least we have aknowledged my Crispyducks678 was an ironic response channel to a dynamic IP sock and was not underhand, be it I admitted I was a sock to Alison. Which shows openess. 

Now please take in I was not completely informed at the time on sock puppetry. And though I knew it was wrong, be it my irony response to the IP was trying to show this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alison&diff=prev&oldid=199643368), I thought all admin would see what I was doing to a dynamic IP sock who has been plaguing and trolling the Geordie article using the same pattern of fallacies to take down perfectly connected citations for as long as I have been editing that article for the past 6months; I thought they would see my ironic response account and that I would not acknowledge him with my gregs the baker account. I thought they would see what I was doing. But I can see it from the admins side too: even if they admitted what I had done (which you say they haven't, which is fair enough) they might fear getting caught in a quagmire of perceptual spin from the troll. 

Now I'll demonstrate why I now know what I done was against policy: I have read up on WP:SOCK, and I have informed myself so I know the rules of WP:SOCK. Before I begin I would like you to know I don't believe in sock puppetry, my crispyducks678 account was an ironic response to a sock troll, for a demonstration purpose to the sock i.e. showin the sock what he was doing. 

'''My next socks were open socks (I've admitted them) that were 'protest socks' that come about as a consequence of me not knowing an appeals process to show my case''', '''and the fact I was against an egg time on an article up for deletion, conveniently put up when I was gagged that I had a current interest in. I did not take any joy in them at all, I also disliked the fact that the 212+ sock IP could apply a convenient ad hominem of a sock and associate my account with his sock to suppress my say which would have elucidated his fallacies... But I felt I had been gagged and I chained myself with a placard to the wiki parliment if you like.''' '''If you look since I pulled the wrong wire, in the films they are always the red one connected on the timer, and I haven't socked since the egg timer ran out.''' '''I'm strongly against sock puppetry, that was what my ironic crispyducks678 was about.'''

- I have realised any ironic response sock might even promote the idea of sock puppetry, which is not what the project needs... 

- I have read the rules on WP:SOCK

- I've learned it is not in my interest to demonstrate to a sock, what he is doing. 

- I've never done sock puppetry (Though I did do an ironic sock, and, again, that lead to a banning with me through inexperience percieving no way to show my case in an egg timer which lead to protest socks trying to show whilst I was gagged the opportunistic fallacies and thus his blinding -to people who didn't know the subject like the brief readers from other countries- of the verification) and I will never do sock puppetry.

I'm a fair user who believes in reference material for people to research and verify to a degree, I believe that is a human right. Sockpuppetry is not in my interest, or wiki's interests. |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=[[User:Hersfold|'''''<em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers</em><em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold</em>''''']], Ok so at least we have aknowledged my Crispyducks678 was an ironic response channel to a dynamic IP sock and was not underhand, be it I admitted I was a sock to Alison. Which shows openess. 

Now please take in I was not completely informed at the time on sock puppetry. And though I knew it was wrong, be it my irony response to the IP was trying to show this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alison&diff=prev&oldid=199643368), I thought all admin would see what I was doing to a dynamic IP sock who has been plaguing and trolling the Geordie article using the same pattern of fallacies to take down perfectly connected citations for as long as I have been editing that article for the past 6months; I thought they would see my ironic response account and that I would not acknowledge him with my gregs the baker account. I thought they would see what I was doing. But I can see it from the admins side too: even if they admitted what I had done (which you say they haven't, which is fair enough) they might fear getting caught in a quagmire of perceptual spin from the troll. 

Now I'll demonstrate why I now know what I done was against policy: I have read up on WP:SOCK, and I have informed myself so I know the rules of WP:SOCK. Before I begin I would like you to know I don't believe in sock puppetry, my crispyducks678 account was an ironic response to a sock troll, for a demonstration purpose to the sock i.e. showin the sock what he was doing. 

'''My next socks were open socks (I've admitted them) that were 'protest socks' that come about as a consequence of me not knowing an appeals process to show my case''', '''and the fact I was against an egg time on an article up for deletion, conveniently put up when I was gagged that I had a current interest in. I did not take any joy in them at all, I also disliked the fact that the 212+ sock IP could apply a convenient ad hominem of a sock and associate my account with his sock to suppress my say which would have elucidated his fallacies... But I felt I had been gagged and I chained myself with a placard to the wiki parliment if you like.''' '''If you look since I pulled the wrong wire, in the films they are always the red one connected on the timer, and I haven't socked since the egg timer ran out.''' '''I'm strongly against sock puppetry, that was what my ironic crispyducks678 was about.'''

- I have realised any ironic response sock might even promote the idea of sock puppetry, which is not what the project needs... 

- I have read the rules on WP:SOCK

- I've learned it is not in my interest to demonstrate to a sock, what he is doing. 

- I've never done sock puppetry (Though I did do an ironic sock, and, again, that lead to a banning with me through inexperience percieving no way to show my case in an egg timer which lead to protest socks trying to show whilst I was gagged the opportunistic fallacies and thus his blinding -to people who didn't know the subject like the brief readers from other countries- of the verification) and I will never do sock puppetry.

I'm a fair user who believes in reference material for people to research and verify to a degree, I believe that is a human right. Sockpuppetry is not in my interest, or wiki's interests. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}