| Revision as of 23:58, 4 November 2007 editNotSarenne (talk | contribs)132 edits →Real names← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 12:27, 6 March 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {| align="center" class="notice noprint" style="background: lightblue; border: 1px solid #aaa; padding: 0.5em; margin: 0.5em auto;" | |||
| I have blocked you as a sock of {{vandal|Sarenne}}. If you wish to contest this block, please use the {{tl|unblock}} template. <font face="comic sans ms">] <small>]</small></font> 17:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| |- | |||
| | valign="top" style="padding: 0.1em" | ] ] | |||
| | style="padding: 0.1em" | | |||
| <big>'''Blocked as a sockpuppet'''<br /></big><br clear="all" /> | |||
| '''''You have been ] indefinitely''''' as a ] of ] (<span style="font-size:0.9em;" class="plainlinks">] • ] • • }})</span>. As a blocked or banned user '''you are not entitled to edit Misplaced Pages'''. All of your edits have been reverted. | |||
| Details of how to appeal a block can be found at: ].<!-- Template:Sockblock --></div> | |||
| {{unblock reviewed|1=I am not a sock.|decline=As I see it, there are two possibilities. One is that you are a brand new user who is already very familiar with Misplaced Pages's policies, who is familiar with how one goes about avoiding a block and who even knows how to find the administrators' noticeboard, after only a few days of use, and who purely by coincidence, happened to choose the same name as a blocked user. The other is that you are a sockpuppet of ]. One of these possibilities is considerably more likely than the other. Unblock declined. — ]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> (] · ])</span> 18:25, 4 November 2007 (UTC)}} --] 17:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
| == This is unbelievable == | |||
| {{{category|]}}} | |||
| I have picked this account name NotSarenne because I have a lot of humour. Initially, I was editing "anonymously". I was constantly accused of being a sock puppet of ]. As I didn't like my IP addresses being tracked and linked to each other and also did not want to risk getting a whole block of my ISP blocked (I no static IP address), I decided to create this account. | |||
| ] --'''<span style="background:Black;color:White"> ]|]|] </span>''' 00:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I've written it several times, truthfully, that I am not Sarenne and not related to him or her in any way whatsoever. How can I prove it? I cannot prove it. That's no rocket science but simple logic. I simply cannot believe that my account is blocked ''indefinitely''. I have provably been harassed by unidentifiable users whereas one of them was actually convicted as being a sock puppet of ]. This user has not been blocked, not even temporarily. Since the creation of my account I have made several admittedly minor contributions to clarify phrases in articles concerning units of computer storage but also a few unrelated articles. I've kept civil and did not make false accusation on purpose and did not violate any policies at all despite receiving heavy flak in form of false accusations from at least two users who disagree with me on | |||
| the topic of ]. I'm heavily disappointed that the admin who blocked me measures with two standards. Oh, the irony... | |||
| Also quite obviously the admin did not bother at all to provide sufficient credible evidence at all but fell for hearsay and the sheer mass of constant false accusations against me. --] 17:37, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :If you are not Sarenne, the easiest way for you to resolve this issue would be to choose a new username unrelated to Sarenne, forget completely about this account, and avoid editing in ways that make people think you are Sarenne. There are so many other things to do here, there must be something you are interested in besides binary prefixes. — Carl <small>(] · ])</small> 19:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks for your comment. You are right and for the record I have anonymously edited articles on completely unrelated topics. However, if contributions are suppressed as it has happened in my case, I will certainly not ever waste a single second with Misplaced Pages. You see I simply cannot trust it anymore if people with power here are acting against all common sense and logic. Keep in mind, I have not been blocked temporarily to calm down or the like for which I would have a certain amount of understanding. No, I have been blocked indefinitely based on false evidence. --] 19:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::: Just look at . Vandalism?? THIS IS MADNESS!1 Why, I ask everyone who might read this, why is ] allowed to terrorize me? Why is there not a single person, admin or not, telling him to cease his vendetta against me and cease to revert my edits using false accusations as summary? Is this the spirit of Misplaced Pages? --] 19:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::I think that the issue is that using the username NotSarenne automatically implies that people think you are Sarenne, and puts you in the strange position of having to argue that you are not Sarenne, which is difficult because of your contributions. Choosing a new username should eliminate that problem, as would avoiding the area of binary prefixes for a while. This is just a suggestion of one possible way to resolve the situation. — Carl <small>(] · ])</small> 19:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::That might be true but I have a sneaking suspicion that this would frowned upon. Doesn't it violate some kind of policy if create a new account? I mean the block reason is certainly hold against me as person and not me as a Misplaced Pages user. I don't even want an account but I was already told that is disallowed to keep editing anonymously. Let me also say that I have not made any controversial edits against the status quo since creation of my account. I have been accused of such edits by two users and two sock puppets but always falsely as can verified using my contribution log. That is I have definitely ceased to replace KB with KiB etc. See I've been strongly and repeatedly accused of being Sarenne even before I created my account NotSarenne, so I don't think it's a red rag or makes much of a difference. --] 19:55, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::: It is a violation of policy to create a new account and edit once you have been blocked, the specific violation is circumvention of a block. It is also not allowd to edit anonymously once you have been blocked, although it is much harder to action that block since there is no user name. However what will most likely happen now is that pages where you have "contributed" will be semi-protected, stopping IP users from editing. Also any new IP users, in your ISP IP range or using Tor, who make changes to add the IEC units will most likely fall under suspicion of being you so your actions have damaged the ability of other IP users to make their changes. Your contribution log was the reason why you were blocked for being guilty of using sockpuppets, just like ]. ''']]''' 21:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| == Email address == | |||
| Another user has asked that you set an email address in preferences. --]]]<small>(st47)</small> 22:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| : I can has email address?!? --] 22:32, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Real names== | |||
| We do ''not'' reveal the real names of other editors, unless they have chosen to make them public. I have fully deleted those edits, so that they will not appear in this page's edit history. Please do not repeat the offense. -]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> (] · ])</span> 22:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :If Fnagaton is so stupid to pick a username he's been using for years and reveals his real-life identity with a simple Google search, that's not our problem. I respect your wish though because you've shown at least ''some'' degree of neutrality. --] 22:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Regarding your recommendation to create a new account, as you might have read above, Fnagaton does not allow this and Fnagaton is the boss here as far as I understand. --] 22:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::] is not the boss (we're all the boss together); but he is correctly informing you about the rules. If vandals and disruptive users make a decision to reform and edit constructively, quietly creating a new user account and resurrecting as a completely new, totally constructive user is an accepted way to do it. From your recent edits, though, you just don't appear to be interested in participating in a nondisruptive way, so you shouldn't bother creating a new account- as soon as you start using it to disrupt again, you'll just get blocked again. You'll be better off just turning off the computer and reading a book. Have you read ] at all? He's very funny. -]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> (] · ])</span> 22:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::Let me tell you, Misplaced Pages does not work the way as you claim it. I changed my IP address after my first block and made useful contributions in accordance to this discussion: ] I had suggested it and even the bad guys agreed to it ''after'' they had achieved to block me. I updated the handful of pages making undisputable edits not conflicting with ] at all. Getting a new IP address and making anonymous edits (for me business as usual as it's been for 2+ years) is equivalent to creating a new account, isn't it? Absolutely nothing was wrong with those edit. I wrote correct and clear edit summaries too. There was no sensible reason whatsoever to revert this edits. They were only reverted because ''I'' made them. Do you understand this? Did I make myself perfectly clear? Do you grasp what has been going on here for days? No, I have not read ] and thanks to the long-winded circular discussions I wouldn't have had any time for reading books anyway. --] 23:10, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::I see you've withdrawn that suggestion. That's fine but don't annoy me with religious dreck. I came here in the name of science and the truth. It's very funny that you claim he is ''correctly'' informing me about the rules. What a piece of bullshit. This just shows you didn't both to check his contribution history at all. I can't blame you, it's too much scum to wade through by now. --] 22:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I'm not positive, but I think Terry Pratchett is an atheist, or at least an agnostic. -]<span style="font-size: smaller;"> (] · ])</span> 23:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I was talking about the other recommendation on your own talk page. However, if picking NotSarenne (because I am not Sarenne no matter how often it is proven by assertion) is too much of humour for Misplaced Pages, I better steer clear of any kind of humour here. --] 23:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :You can also see that a certain individual always resorts to same illogical argumentation. "Strawman". LOL. That guy is predictable like a shell script. --] 23:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 12:27, 6 March 2023
 
|
Blocked as a sockpuppet |
-- But|seriously|folks 00:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Categories: