User talk:Poon holder

March 2022

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Fentanyl—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 11:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

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).

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

Request reason:

Im not a racist fash like the rest of you, example: uncle ruckus is left for months but any change deemed against your political motives are removed immediately. This is not the place for mindless ignorance against the "side" you dont align with. Your a bunch of national socialists and everyone is starting to see! Poon holder (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Requests with personal attacks are not considered. 331dot (talk) 09:53, 28 January 2023 (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.

FYI A.Rayner flashed her cooch on the front bench and G.Floyd had enough fentanyl in his system to kill a heard of buffalo. Do you want me to provide references? I can understand reediting but a ban is unjust. What will become of the wiki if all that moderate are proponents of the feed back loop of modern propagandised society!? Likely and ecosystem that has rampant input from a select few who refuse to act fairly. This is very unhealthy indeed! Unblock me, there is work to do. I won't make any further funny truths unless back-able with wiki standards. Many thanks. Poon holder (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do not alter closed requests. I have placed your comment above. You may make a new request for someone else to review, but you will quickly lose access to this page without a significant change in attitude. 331dot (talk) 10:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The wiki-semantics are trying at the best of times, I mean no harm in editing a closed request, apologies. However I feel the simplicity of starting a new page undermines your incentive to block whom you consider dissident. I have said nothing incorrect.

Please unblock this page, if anything to strengthen the moderation process. What do you mean last warning? Are you going to delete me for apologising now? Poon holder (talk) 10:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

cat got your tongue? Poon holder (talk) 10:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do not alter closed requests; it can be removed when the block is removed. You are not blocked for having dissident views, you are blocked for your behavior(including loading down your user page with an extremely vulgar word that would offend what few female contributors we have). You may make a new request for someone else to review in which you discuss your inappropriate actions, tell what you will do differently, and what edits you intend to make.

Believe it or not, I have other things that warrant my attention and I am not always available for immediate replies. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That last sentence I do not believe!

As, should I change cooch to vulva, would that appease the wiki gods? For by wiki standards: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cooch

Is indeed a belly dance or a vulva, US or UK disambiguation would render it slang or not. Is this really what you spend you time arguing over...

My first point is rendered more solid still by your continued bias moderation.

Bad times when it comes to this.

Thanks for your time.

FWIW I have no intended direction in my desired future edits than to preserve the changing truths and their correct assembly into what is and no doubt will continue to be the words most diverse encyclopaedia. Poon holder (talk) 10:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think if you make a new request with such a statement it is unlikely to be accepted. Please read the unblock appeals guide to learn how to craft a request likely to be accepted. 331dot (talk) 10:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This string of comments confirms my initial grievances. There is a sick underbelly to Wiki. Dogmatic rules I will no abide with. Time I will not spend conforming to such rules, a new page is created in less and your petty actions will lead to no resolve.

Nice knowing you 331, ground yourself in the knowledge you make up what is so sour within wiki. Poon holder (talk) 10:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the one who blocked you. It's certainly true that this sort of environment isn't for everyone. I hope you find a place more suited to you. 331dot (talk) 15:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]