| Revision as of 04:08, 4 May 2009 editLovesMacs (talk | contribs)Rollbackers5,944 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 72.249.76.65 identified as vandalism to last revision by NawlinWiki. using TW← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:24, 4 May 2009 edit undo87.69.176.215 (talk) Don't hide my answer, it's immoral enough that two users that have nothing to do with this affair got blocked because of the witch hunt conducted by Bugs and George!!!Next edit → | ||
| Line 172: | Line 172: | ||
| The IP denies being Smedpull, and here he is "talking to himself" on the talk page of Smedpull's successor, {{Userlinks|Chingadiculous}}, also implying by the "vigilante" comment that he will continue vandalizing, out of self-righteous wrath. Yet here's an oddity - the IP posting a "talkback" reference on Chingadiculous' talk page three days ago, a day before the checkuser inquiry was posted. Why would he do that? ] <sup>'']''</sup> ] 12:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | The IP denies being Smedpull, and here he is "talking to himself" on the talk page of Smedpull's successor, {{Userlinks|Chingadiculous}}, also implying by the "vigilante" comment that he will continue vandalizing, out of self-righteous wrath. Yet here's an oddity - the IP posting a "talkback" reference on Chingadiculous' talk page three days ago, a day before the checkuser inquiry was posted. Why would he do that? ] <sup>'']''</sup> ] 12:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :Because of , which Captain Infinity quickly removed. Doesn't like seeing support for the other side, I guess. I didn't want to keep editing because I'd like to take my wikibreak and somewhat respect the block, but your ridiculous allegations have left me no choice. Again, I must defend myself by simply telling the truth. ] (]) 23:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
| :It is often disappointing to expect that an irrational person's actions are based on any reasoning. ] 19:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | ::It is often disappointing to expect that an irrational person's actions are based on any reasoning. ] 19:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::Good point. To use an outrageous analogy, as that user sometimes does, it's like asking, "Why does a serial killer do what he does?" The answer turns out to be either, "He's crazy", or "He's evil", or perhaps a combination of the two. That's the closest thing to a "rational" explanation. ] <sup>'']''</sup> ] 20:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | :::Good point. To use an outrageous analogy, as that user sometimes does, it's like asking, "Why does a serial killer do what he does?" The answer turns out to be either, "He's crazy", or "He's evil", or perhaps a combination of the two. That's the closest thing to a "rational" explanation. ] <sup>'']''</sup> ] 20:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::::I'll quote my own analogy: when the sheriff is drunk and the cops are corrupt... well, you get my point. Crazy? Evil? No. Disappointed and outraged with the dirty politics I've experienced lately? Definitely. Put an innocent man in jail and you've created a monster. ] (]) 23:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 07:24, 4 May 2009
_by_Ron.jpg){kind=small}
 Talk page archives - Archive index | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
If you want to send me a confidential message here is my gpg public key: User talk:Chillum/GPG Public Key
thanks
for helping at my talk p. If you need help on yours... DGG (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Nasty tone, and edit warring... a block is just a natural reaction. Chillum 21:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Do you know what his claims about you are all about? Chillum 21:32, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Never mind. His claims are clearly baseless. Chillum 21:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
lets hope for the best, because he's gone back to NPP, with the same mix of 3/4 good and 1/4 bad tags. it might help if you could keep track of what he's tagging and give him the next round of assistance. I do patrol speedy & I'm not going to pass over something because its he who has tagged it, but I dont want to keep posting on his page. FWIW, I've made a point of deleting when he has good tags, if someone doesnt beat me to it. DGG (talk) 03:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
- I am keeping half an eye on his contribs. Chillum 05:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
- Well it turns out this user was a grade A troll, using proxies to put pictures of crap on people's pages and everything. Now blocked indef for general foolish behavior. Chillum 02:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
WP:ANI Repeated_personal_attacks_of_User:Shannon_Rose
FYI. Ikip (talk) 15:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing that out. Chillum 16:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your comments on ANI. I'm a bit perplexed by the discussion there that an uncivil user posting a duplicitous external link and forging a media-wiki interface is being condoned, yet this well-intended admin is being bashed. It's clear that I spend far too much time trying to help this project. Toddst1 (talk) 22:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
- Sometimes a conversation can have less common sense than those involved in it. Chillum 22:29, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
You and I on the same side?
- This is a response to an e-mail I received.
Yes, I was also a bit surprised to find us agreeing on an issue. Perhaps it is a sign of a brave new future? Chillum 21:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
A belated Thank You
You've helped me considerably with your opinion expressed on my page. I completely understand the basics of vandalism vs "bad/weird edits". I also understand the relationship is constantly fluid and will change with the direction of the wind. I am going to be on the wrong side of that fence from time to time, but I'm willing to take my lumps and (hopefully) learn from them. As you've probably seen me post before, please feel free to let me know if ever have occasion to offer opinions or suggestions regarding my edits. See ya 'round Tiderolls 22:21, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- All right then I will! Chillum 22:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Ok.
Sorry about that. I thought it meant something else. --Abce2 (talk) 22:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, the imagery that a literal interpretation of "halfassed" conjures is truly funny. Chillum 22:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert
Good to see you hard at work :) Tiderolls 15:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- It is like playing Whac-A-Mole! Well, more like Whac-A-Troll. Chillum 15:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm just wondering how that guy got my brother's pic :o\ Tiderolls 15:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy
Please look at Misplaced Pages talk:Username policy#Here's an idea. --Whip it! 04:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
- Nice name. Devo comes to mind for some reason. Chillum 05:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
Talk page protection
I guess you'd better. Believe it or not, it won't be the first time :o\ Tiderolls 00:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
- Consider it done. Chillum 00:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Gracias. Tiderolls 00:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Griffinofwales (talk) 23:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
WQA closure
I'm not sure if this is the best place to ask, but here goes: There were two WQAs filed against me that made baseless claims (you commented as such on the first). On top of there being nothing to the complainst, both complaining accounts have now been blocked as part of a string of sockpuppet accounts confirmed by checkuser. In short, the comments I made suggesting that these editors were acting inappropriately and which brought the complaints of supposed baiting/hounding/lying have all been proven. Would it be too much to ask to have those sections finally marked as resolved for being baseless and made in bad faith? DreamGuy (talk) 15:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- I think it would be perfectly reasonable to ask for a closing. I am not too familiar with that noticeboard, but I assume they follow common sense there like we do everywhere else(hehe in a perfect world). Chillum 15:28, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
re
Alright here we go agin do they own the artical i am adden information but they remove it why is it ok for them to do that but not me it seems 1 sided and not right. Yourname (talk) 21:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
If you check the talk page there seems to be a reasonable amount Yourname (talk) 21:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- We can discuss this on your talk page. Chillum 21:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
ok All replays will be made there after this Yourname (talk) 21:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
- You vandal you... ---I'm Spartacus! 00:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
- Wheee! Well considering the primary problem with that use is that he does not know the difference between people not letting him do something disruptive, and vandalism... I am not too surprised. Chillum 00:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
- Thought you might get a kick out of it... while i wasn't involved there, I had my own doubts about him. His talk page was on my watch list because I declined two of his speedy deletions, and explained why. Rather than respond to those criticisms, he simply removed the note. So seeing your post, was affirmation that he acted this way routinely.---I'm Spartacus! 00:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Yourname
Not sure you watch DGG's talk so heads up I left you a note here. Not watching here but I watch there so no need to let me know if you respond there. StarM 03:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
- Was a checkuser performed, or is it not even necessary at this point? - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
- I have not seen any indication that he is using alternate accounts. But then he did come back to troll with multiple IPs, so perhaps it would be fruitful. I am not very experienced filing checkuser requests, I have only done so a couple of time. Chillum 19:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
thanks for beating me to the block of . QUack quack. StarM 03:12, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- This whole check user thing is starting to sound useful. Chillum 04:38, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
If anything, it should ferret out any other socks he may have if they've not gone stale. At least I think that's how it works. Can you tell I don't work in the area frequently? I just report on occasion. StarM 11:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Another IP, same obsession with the shit pics, literally. SPI Filed StarM 00:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
- My initial thought went along the lines of the Check-User... since this is a series of IP's there isn't much we can do... just wait it out... but he apparently only has access to about 5 or 6 IP's... they are being recycled. And looking at the histories of some of them, it looks as if they were blocked previously as Socks of other blocked users...---I'm Spartacus! 02:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- I bet some of those are open proxies. I will nmap them later and block any proxies for a few months. Chillum 04:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
User talk:90.193.28.231
Is there anyway you can talk to this user on his talk page. He just doesn't seem to understand that I didn't post the IP, that it was SineBot. I have tried to explain it to him and he thinks I am trying to get him in trouble with Anonymous. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 29, 2009 @ 05:34
- I have explained on his talk page. I think this person gets it, but is carrying on none-the-less. Chillum 05:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I kinda think so too, but wanted to pass it on to someone else as I am heading off to bed soon. Thanks :) - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 29, 2009 @ 05:40
My email
Please publish the email on my page in full! It was a wiki-mail I have not a copy of it, or I would. And when you return there with it, please explain why VK cannot have a picture of the assembled Royal families of Europe in mourning on his page, without you calling it an attack! Giano (talk) 20:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
The IP Editor
Nobody can ever say that we didn't try. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:28, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- I unblock a person who has a 24 hour block, and they use the freedom to find a 1 week block. Give a person enough rope... Chillum 20:30, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I honestly expected it earlier, considering their behaviour in ANI. Good patience on you though. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- I have just started an essay on the subject, it is very new and has little content. I would like to have it on a few people's watchlists so I can get feedback. User:Chillum/Enough rope. Chillum 20:36, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Done :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:39, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I would make them more anonymous ... "Situation A: the editor did X and Y, then admin B did Z..." (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:52, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- To be honest there are too many people who believe that cool-off blocks are not productive. I think only through evidence can this be shown to be false. A simple set of hypothetical events will not convince people. Chillum 20:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- I just wanted to say good block. He's had more than enough chances and this was totally unnecessary. It wasn't a cool-off block as a "we told you to knock it off and you wouldn't." -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, re 87.69.176.81. I'm amazed at the amount of patience you folks had with this guy. --Captain Infinity (talk) 23:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Lets hear ya then!
Lets hear ya then!
Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Kittybrewster_editing_disruptively--Vintagekits (talk) 21:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
87.69.176.81, Smedpull, etc.
Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mexicomida
Repeating some of what I said to Georgewilliamherbet...
The user continues to produce new socks:
- 87.69.130.190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- 87.69.57.241 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- 87.69.14.117 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
This edit suggests he's figured out how to change IP's frequently.
The IP denies being Smedpull, and here he is "talking to himself" on the talk page of Smedpull's successor, Chingadiculous (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), also implying by the "vigilante" comment that he will continue vandalizing, out of self-righteous wrath. Yet here's an oddity - the IP posting a "talkback" reference on Chingadiculous' talk page three days ago, a day before the checkuser inquiry was posted. Why would he do that? Baseball Bugs carrots 12:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- Because of this diff, which Captain Infinity quickly removed. Doesn't like seeing support for the other side, I guess. I didn't want to keep editing because I'd like to take my wikibreak and somewhat respect the block, but your ridiculous allegations have left me no choice. Again, I must defend myself by simply telling the truth. 87.69.177.26 (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- It is often disappointing to expect that an irrational person's actions are based on any reasoning. Chillum 19:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. To use an outrageous analogy, as that user sometimes does, it's like asking, "Why does a serial killer do what he does?" The answer turns out to be either, "He's crazy", or "He's evil", or perhaps a combination of the two. That's the closest thing to a "rational" explanation. Baseball Bugs carrots 20:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- I'll quote my own analogy: when the sheriff is drunk and the cops are corrupt... well, you get my point. Crazy? Evil? No. Disappointed and outraged with the dirty politics I've experienced lately? Definitely. Put an innocent man in jail and you've created a monster. 87.69.177.26 (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- Good point. To use an outrageous analogy, as that user sometimes does, it's like asking, "Why does a serial killer do what he does?" The answer turns out to be either, "He's crazy", or "He's evil", or perhaps a combination of the two. That's the closest thing to a "rational" explanation. Baseball Bugs carrots 20:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
- It is often disappointing to expect that an irrational person's actions are based on any reasoning. Chillum 19:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)