User talk:Ragemanchoo

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).

Ragemanchoo (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 violating the three revert rule. I apologize for this and promise not to do it again. If unblocked, I'm not going to continue reverting. Instead, I will attempt to find a compromise on the talk page, and if that doesn't work, I'll try dispute resolution. The blocking policy states that blocks are not a punishment, but a means to prevent future problems. Because I've promised not to cause any more problems, my block no longer serves a purpose allowed by the blocking policy. Therefore, I request to be unblocked.

Decline reason:

You've copy-pasted the wrong example from WP:GAB. You are blocked for incivility, not 3RR. — Sandstein 07:10, 24 August 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.

{unblock-ip|1=71.59.165.208|2=[[WP:CIVIL|Incivility]]: repeated incivility|3=Toddst1}

^ What does this mean, anyway?

It means you were being rude to someone. Tone down the anger and don't be so hostile in some of your comments. -- Ned Scott 06:38, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do I do from here? BTW a girl ("Luna") responded to my email but then stopped when I had more questions. I'm really going to need to be unblocked, if only for correcting the typos/link errors, etc. I come across while browsing. I'm also going to need a concrete email address I can report problems and problem people to. That sock puppet bullshit I was getting spammed with a few months back is a prime example. --Ragemanchoo (talk) 05:47, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Altered States

Altered States back in the 1980s using sensory deprivation tank experiments did NOT lead to ripping a hole into another dimension. Only mundane hallucinations were produced. You have been greatly misinformed. Kazuba (talk) 10:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC) (I really enjoyed the movie Altered States. Catch the 1998 film Dark City also with William Hurt.)[reply]

Block review

It's been a while since I looked at the comments you were blocked for, so I'm not sure if I found the right examples, but so far I'm having a hard time figuring out why you were given an indef block. You've been here for about a year, there was no RFC or any real attempt to discuss the civility matter with you (that I can find), so this seems a bit much. I'll support unblocking you if you wish to make another {{unblock}} request. -- Ned Scott 05:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly a history of helpful edits, some incivility..I'd definitely consider supporting unblock too. -Pete (talk)

I'm not going to spend any time arguing against the unblock (you can read through the history of the user's talk page for that), but I ask that any admin who unblocks solicit a promise to follow WP:TALK. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP numbers

BTW, if you don't want people "evading a ban", then you should ban IP numbers along with screen names the first time around. I'm surprised this isn't already done. Don't get too pissed when people discover they can still edit while not signed in. --Ragemanchoo (talk) 08:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]