Misplaced Pages

User talk:Freestylefrappe: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →
Revision as of 15:48, 10 September 2006 view sourceLar (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators29,168 edits →Unblock now: support← Previous edit Revision as of 15:49, 10 September 2006 view source Tony Sidaway (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers81,722 editsm Protected User talk:Freestylefrappe: Blocked editor continuing personal attacks Next edit →
(No difference)

Revision as of 15:49, 10 September 2006

Vicente Fox incident

Hahahaha Mackensen and Chacor have discovered I'm using sockpuppets by editing under a new account! Not only that, but I have another sockpuppet called Tchadienne! HAHAHAHAHAHA. See relevant discussion on WP:AN/I#Mexican politicians and BLP. freestylefrappe 19:29, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Note, the above statements are obviously sarcastic... somehow this was lost on multiple users, some of whom somehow became administrators. freestylefrappe 01:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Block

You have been blocked to the end of what would have been the duration of Tchadienne's block. From your comment above, I imagine that you can understand why. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Incidentally, if you would prefer to use a different user name for your main account, I can shorten the block on one of your other socks and block this account instead. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Unblocking list

Freestylefrappe,

Please stop sending e-mails to the Unblock list. You have admitted using sockpuppets both here and in your e-mails. You should serve the balance of your ban as previously determined.

If you continue to spam the unblocking list, you will be banned from sending messages to it. Capitalistroadster 23:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Capitalistroadster, you're lie that I am spamming the unblock list and refusal to send out any of my emails is not amusing. Find someone else to harass. freestylefrappe 01:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I wish to communicate, you wish to prevent me from doing so

TenOfAllTrades, I challenge you to provide an email address I can contact you at, or email me at danofalltrades7@hotmail.com, so that I may explain why I have never used sockpuppets, I have never admitted to doing so, and when I am unblocked the actions you have taken will result in your desysopping. If you choose not to you are proving that you ar knowingly abusing power and engaging in intimidation.

My Misplaced Pages email address has been set and working for some time; I'm not sure why you would need to 'challenge' me for something that's already available. Mind you, I'd prefer an open discussion on-wiki, to ensure a maximum amount of transparency in resolving this problem. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

{{helpme|I want CBDunkerson or another rational user, not Pgk or Mackensen or another admin currently involved in a dispute with me, to evaluate the merits of Centrx's protecting of my talkpage and TenOfAllTrades indef block of my current account. When that has been completed you may remove this template. Until then, leave this be.}}

Message for Ryulong

I believe I said a rational user, not an administrator who supports a known vandal, reverts good faith edits by an anonymous user , and then has the audacity to warn him on his talkpage, accusing him of vandalism! Did you even look at the anonymous user's edit? The one which Hseldon10 continually reverted, labeling it vandalism? The assertion in the article is shown to be false here, on Forbes. Forbes is what one might call a "reliable source." This is undoubtedly a new concept for you since your reversion added numerous unsourced statements such as the bolded section in the following sentence: "Fox's term has been marked by an unprecedented economic stability and by a democratic atmosphere that is new to Mexico." You also re-added four paragraphs of unreferenced, unsourced commentary on Fox's housing policy. An unreferenced, unsourced paragraph on Fox's health policy talking about "government insurance schemes," and an unreferenced, unsourced paragraph claiming Fox's administration has arrested 35,000 people involved in drug trafficking. freestylefrappe 01:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Please, allow me to welcome you to Misplaced Pages. I hope you read through and familiarize yourself with Misplaced Pages's policies.

Welcome!

Hello, Freestylefrappe, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

"Email this user"

For some reason I have never been able to get the "email this user" function to work. As I said before, either email me so I can reply, or provide an email here. You talk of transparency yet you do not unprotect my current account's talkpage. Does that not seem contradictory to you? Does blocking me after I added a source to Vicente Fox make sense to you? Does protecting my talkpage after I provided standard RFC level evidence really seem legitimate to you? The ball is not in my court as you all are trying to misportray. I have not violated Misplaced Pages policies. I have not been presented with a single diff proving a single allegation against me. The sockpuppetry BS alleged by Chacor has not been proved, despite Mackensen's nonsense post indicating otherwise. No diff supports my supposed WP:POINT violation on WP:AN/I. I have proved my case. You fail to prove yours again and again and again. freestylefrappe 01:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

If the "email this user" function doesn't work, I suggest you upgrade your browser and/or file a bug report with the MediaWiki software folks. -- SCZenz 02:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
First, I wasn't the one who protected User talk:Ya ya ya ya ya ya. You'll need to take the matter up with Centrx.
Second, I'm inclined to believe a CheckUser when he says that accounts are clearly related.
Third, you can always make your case on this talk page rather than trying to do it over email. (I can't imagine why the 'Email this user' link isn't working; are you using an odd browser? Perhaps it would be worthwhile to file a bug report.) It is by far the most transparent approach, and it will encourage all participants in the discussion to abide by WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA.
Finally, if you'd prefer to use one of your other accounts, you can let me know here, and I'll shorten the block on it and indef block this account instead. Frankly, I don't believe it's appropriate to allow you to continue to use multiple accounts when most of them have managed to accrue several blocks. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I love how all of your suggestions are completely impossible. "Take that up with Centrx." How exactly am I supposed to do that when you indefinitely blocked my account? Perhaps I could add a helpme template and you could revert that and protect the page? Any other ideas? Note: Since you are unable to recognize it, you should know that the above sentences contain the element of sarcasm.
Second, Mackensen did not complete a checkuser, he based his "proven" claim on a diff Chacor provided in which I stated that I was Freestylefrappe.
Third, your assertion that I can always make my case on my talkpage is truly astonishing. What the hell do you think I was doing when Centrx protected my page and blocked me? Are you insane, or are you trying to provoke me?
And finally, I do not care what you think about my having multiple accounts. This is allowed, they are not sockpuppets, and you already know this. Stop wasting my time, post your email or fudge off. freestylefrappe 02:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I'll take the last option, thanks. If you want to email stuff to me that you expect will get this talk page protected if you post it publicly, then I don't think that private discussion will be productive.
Incidentally, have you set your own email address in your preferences and reconfirmed it? It's possible that that might be why your 'Email this user' doesn't work. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment

You've gathered quite a following, CBD. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 04:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. --CBD 13:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I always take your (Chairboy) incivility with a laugh. freestylefrappe 20:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Pardon? I don't understand. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:53, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Was I incorrect in assuming you were insulting me? That's how your message came across. I dont see another way to interpret that. freestylefrappe 01:55, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
Please explain. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 02:27, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


Administrative abuse, policy violations, and vandalism

The following is an ongoing list of users who have either violated policy, abused their administrative power, or just outright vandalized Misplaced Pages in the Vicente Fox incident.

Bunchograpes

Joseph Solis in Australia

Green caterpillar

Hseldon10

Chacor

Captainktainer

Pgk

Centrx

TenOfAllTrades

Mindspillage

Mackensen

For the record: The last fucking time I edited under the Tchadienne account was August 9. Check my contribs and stop peddling this lie.

Ryulong

Thatcher131

Mike Halterman

Lar

Tony Sidaway

Diff for CBDunkerson's viewing

Yep CBD, you sure were right about the willingness to follow policy on Vicente Fox. That must explain this edit, hmm?

Unblock now

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).

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

Request reason:

I evaded the last block how exactly? Under what account exactly? You can prove this which diffs exactly?

Decline reason:

Per evidence presented at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents --  Netsnipe  ►  13:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I also support this block and see no reason to lift it. If anything, consideration to extension should be given. ++Lar: t/c 15:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

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.

Well that makes the case, doesn't it?

Instead of addressing the question, it just gets added to the list. An even stronger argument as far as I can see that you're just out to cause disruption here instead of address the issues that have been raised about your behaviour and change to being a productive editor and contributor. ++Lar: t/c 15:35, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is the question? TenOfAllTrades refused to provide his email, insisting that this was more transparent. He challenged me to provide my evidence, so I have. You engage in personal attacks and incivility, and expect to be exempt from Misplaced Pages's policies because you are an administrator. Tony Sidaway lied about me being a proven sockpuppeteer, and deleted my evidence, so his actions are added to the list. freestylefrappe 15:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
The question is, why should the litany of alleged abuses above, completely one sided and (for the ones I spot checked) completely without basis in fact, be allowed to remain on a user page? They, in toto, form an attack page, which we don't allow. You can make your case civilly, sure, but this manner isn't it. If you think you have a case, there are mechanisms for dispute resolution. Diatribes on user pages are not part of that mechanism. Especially when you delete responses to them, you don't get to have screeds of this sort. ++Lar: t/c 15:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
If you arent going to provide a serious response, dont respond at all. You dont have to a right to delete what is in effect an RFC page on the egregious violations on Vicente Fox. I have made my case civilly, I am not the one vandalizing other users' talk pages. As soon as this block wears off I'm going to formally start an RFC. At the end of which, assuming you dont abuse your powers, several administrators will be desysopped and WP:BLP will be enforced. If you are not just here to troll on my talkpage, alert CBDunkerson that WP:BLP is being violated once again on Vicente Fox. See the link I provided for CBDunkerson above. freestylefrappe 15:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)