User talk:USARedneck

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).

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

Request reason:

I have looked over all records of the users you say I am and there is no match at all. I believe this block was made by accident. If your referring just to my IP Address that's because I use a VPN I just got and the IP may have been used by someone else.

Decline reason:

Is that also what happened at User:Redneck Dylan, where you are currently claiming that you definitely don't have any other accounts? FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:51, 8 February 2013 (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.

When you say "I have looked over all records of the users you say I am and there is no match at all.", which users are those? (I don't see where anyone has identified them to you - can you please show us where that was, so we can take a look too?) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, scrub that - I'd missed the template on your user page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay it happens sometimes. I just don't understand why I was blocked when I have no relation to the other users at all. I am guessing it has something to do with the VPN I use. USA Redneck • (Questions) 06:53, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it has to do with the checkuser performed on your account and editing behavior. Has nothing to do with your supposed VPN. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 08:18, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point is that a VPN can make multiple users look like they're using the same IP address, and that is part of a checkuser check (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing over the sockpuppetry, just suggesting that VPN use can be relevant). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lets see the checkuser report then please. I have only done a few edits most what I did was fix vandalism one real edit that I did on a article was FFA I know a lot for info about that due to I was apart of the FFA. USA Redneck • (Questions) 09:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified the checkuser concerned about your request. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 12:08, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even without checkuser evidence, I can see similarities. For those similarities to exist and checkuser evidence to suggest you are the same user would be a remarkable coincidence. Checkuser evidence goes way beyond just indicating that the same IP address is used, which, as said above, could by itself be due to use of a VPN. However, the answer to "Lets see the checkuser report then please" is likely, I am afraid, to be "no". The trouble with making public the exact details of what a checkuser can see would be that it would help people to evade checkusers. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:55, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Gotta agree with the first part of what James said above. It would be pretty amazing to have behavior similarities and checkuser evidence and not be the same person. Checkuser aside, the behavior evidence alone could make this a DUCK block. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]