| Revision as of 16:29, 3 December 2007 view sourceThatcher (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,287 edits →Clerk status: so long as we do not refer to the rule of 80← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:04, 4 December 2007 view source 84.220.68.146 (talk) Nobody can be sentenced without a defenceNext edit → | ||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
| ::Ah, ] :) ] 15:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) | ::Ah, ] :) ] 15:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :::So long as we do not refer to the rule of 80. ] 16:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC) | :::So long as we do not refer to the rule of 80. ] 16:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == I claim the right to defend me == | |||
| I was preparing a comment on my talk page, to show why my ban is uncorrect and excessive. I had not the right to reply to my last block, and to defend my self. As a consequence one week block was changed into a permanent block and ban. My request is based on the following therms (see the link. | |||
| ) I was judged as a consequence of several violations that I *never* did and about a supposed "general incivility" based on few minor accidents: I never inserted insults in my edits, despite the kbyte of insults I've received. So, I simply refuse the label of "uncivil", and I can provide several arguments for this claim. I do not ask my unblocking for now, but just the right to edit in my talk page to show my good faith. Nevertheless and administrator has blocked my page. See . Not only I am a good contributor, but I was sentenced on the base of false evidences, and I can provide sources for my claim (and I was working for this). Most of all, the claim I reverted the edits "I did not like", is false: I've reverted just the edits offensive edits, as (I thought) it was my right, perhaps because nobody defended me. Regards. ] | |||
Revision as of 16:04, 4 December 2007
|
I am currently busy in real life. I will check here and respond to questions about my own actions and edits, but I may or may not respond to requests for assistance on other matters. Please see the appropriate noticeboard for assistance. Thank you for your understanding. |
| Noticeboards | |
|---|---|
| Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes. | |
| General | |
| Articles and content | |
| Page handling | |
| User conduct | |
| Other | |
| Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards | |
Good call
...here. I was getting ready to do that. John Reaves 20:36, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I was waiting for one more post to WT:RFAR but then I checked and saw he was trolling Giano too. Unacceptable. Thatcher131 20:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
user: Aynabend
Hi, Could you please have a look at this: ] Thank you in advance. --Aynabend 06:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
beh-nam
beh-nam is evading indef ban by using several annon IPs to vandalise pages... Special:Contributions/64.229.16.84 and Special:Contributions/67.68.54.87 and Special:Contributions/65.95.145.19.--LarrySpin 00:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 17:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Clerk status
My page and the clerk page show you as no longer a clerk (NYB indicated you retired in August), yet I see you doing clerk functions. What is your status? If you previously retired, when did you return? Or were you really just inactive for a while? Cheers, NoSeptember 12:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure that I fit into any particular pigeon hole. I retired, rather than list myself as inactive, for several reasons, one of which is that I do not intend to open or close or babysit any more cases. However, I still sometimes chat with the other clerks on IRC, and if I see something that needs doing, I may occasionally do it. Feel free to categorize me in any way you prefer. Thatcher131 14:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, Senior status :) NoSeptember 15:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- So long as we do not refer to the rule of 80. Thatcher131 16:29, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, Senior status :) NoSeptember 15:11, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I claim the right to defend me
I was preparing a comment on my talk page, to show why my ban is uncorrect and excessive. I had not the right to reply to my last block, and to defend my self. As a consequence one week block was changed into a permanent block and ban. My request is based on the following therms (see the link. ) I was judged as a consequence of several violations that I *never* did and about a supposed "general incivility" based on few minor accidents: I never inserted insults in my edits, despite the kbyte of insults I've received. So, I simply refuse the label of "uncivil", and I can provide several arguments for this claim. I do not ask my unblocking for now, but just the right to edit in my talk page to show my good faith. Nevertheless and administrator has blocked my page. See . Not only I am a good contributor, but I was sentenced on the base of false evidences, and I can provide sources for my claim (and I was working for this). Most of all, the claim I reverted the edits "I did not like", is false: I've reverted just the edits offensive edits, as (I thought) it was my right, perhaps because nobody defended me. Regards. user:Giovanni Giove