User talk:Non Fungible Tolkien

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).

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

Request reason:

I have been blocked for "abusing multiple accounts". I have edited Wikipedia in the past, but not for quite some time. My previous account is easily connected to my real name. As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I am concerned for my privacy and security when dealing with this particular issue. I opened a discussion on ANI that is in no way "abusive". Everything I said is easily verified. I would like to be unblocked and restart that discussion. What do I need to do? Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 20:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is absolutely an abuse of multiple accounts. Your primary account should also be blocked. It is not okay to use a throw-away account to make a report on another user, it is considered evading scrutiny. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 00:47, 7 December 2021 (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.

What you would need to do is let it go. It is, in fact, abusive per WP:SCRUTINY to create a new account or use a sleeper account to avoid scrutiny on your main account, regardless of your rationale for doing so. (IMHO, that rationale is pretty damn threadbare -- what repercussions do you possibly imagine incurring for this? -- and if you're that worried, why take this quite minor incident to ANI in the first place?) Ravenswing 22:09, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravenswing: It makes no difference to me if you find my reasons for creating a separate account "pretty damn threadbare". I am the person responsible for protecting my privacy and safety, not you. Perhaps you would understand if you were in my situation, but you aren't, so you don't know what repercussions I might face. Have you read this discussion? Read it and see if you still think I have done anything against policy. To be quite clear - I am not trying to change or influence policy. I am just asking for a violation of unblocking conditions to be dealt with. Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 23:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just read the discussion. Did you read its conclusions? Nothing in it reverses, provides an exception to, or changes the clear policy in WP:SOCK. You are up against the necessity of trying to convince an admin that (a) Johnpacklambert or his minions know how to find you in real life, and (b) would somehow retaliate against you, because (c) you found it necessary to report him for what frankly is a minor and/or questionable violation, and therefore (d) created a sock account to do it, but (e) because of (a) and (b) you should be excused from the penalties of WP:SOCK, so that (f) you can keep on ... doing what, exactly, with an account you created earlier today?

No, indeed I don't know what repercussions you might face, but if they were all that dire, whether JPL violated a tban wouldn't be the hill I'd choose to die on. But that's just me. Anyway, you do you. Ravenswing 00:20, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess we read the conclusions in that discussion differently. I'm curious why you have chosen to spend your time attacking me instead of, say, discussing the situation with Johnpacklambert? How does this benefit the project? Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 03:31, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question about thread removal

@力: Why did you remove the thread I started about Johnpacklambert violating his topic ban? Did you read what I wrote? Was anything that I wrote incorrect or misleading in any way? What policy or guideline was that thread violating? Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 20:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet template

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Would someone please remove the "sockpuppet" template from my user page?

@Pyramids09: You've only been here since April. Maybe you should leave the sockpuppet tagging to the blocking admin. If they didn't add one, you really don't need to. Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 23:45, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It will be addressed with your unblock request. 331dot (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Non Fungible Tolkien: You are allowed to put warnings on talk pages and block messages if the blocking admin did not put one down (according to my knowledge). Plus, this seems like a thinly-veiled insult. I have more useful things to get pinged about than a sock puppet screaming at a phantom.Pyramids09 (talk) 00:22, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pyramids09: No insult was intended and I am sorry if you felt that I was being insulting. All I meant is that you are a new user without a lot of experience. Just because you can do something, it doesn't make it a good thing to do. Ask yourself if there's any benefit of my user page having a template saying I am a sockpuppet of an unknown person. How is that going to help anyone now that I am blocked? Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 03:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You probably already know this based on your experience, but just wanted to make sure. Blocked on one account means blocked on all accounts. You will need to address this block before using any accounts here including ones that already exist. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 05:58, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we just revoke talk page access? I’m sick of getting notifications. Plus, Non-Fungible Tolkien breaks the talk page guidelines. Pyramids09 (talk) 07:10, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, but you can be blocked from this page if you like, Pyramids09. Please don't post here again. Please don't ping the user again, Non Fungible Tolkien. Bishonen | tålk 08:01, 7 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Question for HighInBC

@HighInBC: You unblocked Johnpacklambert with a note saying that you were "willing to accept that this was a misunderstanding" of the topic ban. Are you willing to accept that this edit to J. Charles Jessup, "American revival preacher", was a "misundertanding"? Or that this edit to Dadi Janki, "Indian spiritual leader", was also a "misunderstanding"? Non Fungible Tolkien (talk) 05:59, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

December 2021

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 06:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have revoked talk page access since you are using the talk page to continue the same behavior that resulted in your original block. You have already been told it is not okay to use an undisclosed alternate account to report on other users. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 06:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]