User talk:I ate the cookie

Blocked as a sockpuppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of a banned or blocked user. Blocked or banned users are not allowed to edit Wikipedia; if you are banned, all edits under this account may be reverted.

Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: Wikipedia:Appealing a block.

Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/I ate the cookie for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 02:15, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer the question

At my talk page - following your edit. Please do so as quickly as possible so that we can confirm you are not a sockpuppet!--VS ^talk 02:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for sock-puppetry as per here Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/I ate the cookie. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. --VS ^talk 02:43, 1 November 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).

I ate the cookie (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am not killkola, and i have emailed the blocking admin to tell him this and been ignored by him. i was not even on a computer when this happened and i tried to explain that it was a co-worker, not me making edits.

Decline reason:

You are responsible for the actions of your account. We can't tell who's on your end of the computer screen. All accounts are supposed to be owned and operated by one person only, and so we treat them as such. The actions of this account are very similar to those of User:Killkola, and it seems quite reasonable to assume they are operated by the same person. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:24, 20 November 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'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).

I ate the cookie (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

i am not killkola and i did not make ANY malicious edits. NOT ONE MALICOUS EDIT. if you are really comparing edits here you can see that i only made a few edits before i was banned. how in the hell can you say we made very similar edits when i only made a couple (of edits) before this crap happened. where is an edit of mine calling CalendarWatcher a douche bag or a faggot? or reverting arthashastra?. or hell show me an edit of mine where i blanked something. the only thing in common is a couple edits to socom fire team bravo 2, which i tried to explain to the blocking admin, is a game we used to play together. and one i made to ganster disciples. this is unbelievable, i just want my account back. if you want to "protect" my talk so i cannot contest this, go ahead i got nothing else to lose. i came here to contribute and instead i am all but called a liar and banned for someone elses actions. what a crock! what the hell else do i have to do?

Decline reason:

You passed the duck test with flying colors. You and Killola and the other socks have a common posting style and edit a lot of the same articles. Plus, I look at edit summaries like this and this and see that you are incivil and prone to making personal attacks. — Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 21 November 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.