User talk:GiantSnowman

2A02:C7F:9E12:8F00:0:0:0:0/64

Can we please explain which block this user is evading, and any evidence you may have to support that? Thank you — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:06, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

IP range used by Woking123 (talk · contribs) who was blocked by @Yunshui:. GiantSnowman 11:11, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

(Keeping discussion in one place.) Thanks, and I found the AN post. But I asked for any evidence you may have to that these are operated for the same person. And I see Legacypac was asking for similar at AN. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:13, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

As I explained at the ARBCOM talk page, it's a clear case of DUCK - same editing pattern, same articles, same content. See also here where @SilkTork: agreed it is a sock. GiantSnowman 11:18, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

I see no agreement from SilkTork that it was a sock in that discussion. Only that they note that the user is blocked as a suspected sock. A note and block that YOU made. You're basically saying that because someone saw that you blocked them based on personal suspicion, that they therefor agree with your suspicion. That's simply not how that works. You may feel it's a clear case of duck, but not only is that not a policy, it's not even a guideline. It's an essay which holds no basis in policy. But even if it was a clear case of duck, that doesn't grant you the discretionary sanction rights. You still need some actual evidence to back up your claim that they're a sock. Otherwise we'd be a complete wild west where anyone could block anyone and simply claim that they're a sock of any randomly blocked editor they choose. Considering you recently blocked an IP, for an edit that was not only correct but also sourced, and you then reverted to the incorrect stats, I'd also like to see your evidence that this range here is really used by this Woking123 because that range is not among the confirmed socks of that account, nor is any other IP for that matter.84.219.252.47 (talk) 06:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)