Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mangojuice (talk | contribs) at 12:30, 25 February 2008 (→Blocked). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Ron, what is with all the accounts? You control this account, User:Ron Duvall, and User:Sarsaparilla, right? The user pages and user talk pages need to be linked with redirects to make it absolutely clear, for instance, where people should leave messages for you. (I'm leaving this message for all three accounts, because it's not clear to me.) Mangojuice 01:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, first of all, I'm going to redirect the other two accounts to this one, so it's clear that you are all the same from both ends. If you want to access your old user or user talk pages, they'll be in the history. Second, if you have any future desire to change your username, I'd strongly recommend that you (1) hold off for at least a month, as you have used three names in the past two weeks already, and (2) change your name through the Misplaced Pages:Changing username system: that way, your contributions can be kept under your new username. (Unfortunately, only the contributions from the most recent account, but still, that's better than nothing. Mangojuice 01:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Why exactly do you have three accounts? They appear to violate Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppets#Voting_and_other_shows_of_support. Superm401 - Talk 15:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Proxy

Re this - you're kidding, right? You just registered your account today! ;P Mangojuice 06:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Delegable proxy

An article that you have been involved in editing, Delegable proxy, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Delegable proxy. Thank you. Superm401 - Talk 16:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Spam

Your repeated requests on user talk pages that people support delegable proxy are inappropriate. The "elected officials", as you put it, have a job to do, and that job is not to push forth your policy agenda. Superm401 - Talk 16:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

STOP

Stop canvassing immediately or else I will block you. Jehochman 16:21, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

And don't ever call other users "crazy". Jehochman 16:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. This is in regard to your "gesture" at User talk:Jehochman. Mangojuice 16:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

This account has been blocked for canvassing, trolling and disruption. The block is indefinite (not infinite) due to the egregious nature of the disruption and my uncertainty with how long a block is necessary to protect the project. If you can convince an administrator to unblock, you may be able to edit again. Jehochman 16:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Note to administrators: Do not unblock this account without discussing with me, or the community at WP:AN. Jehochman 16:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Note, I have blocked Absidy's self-confirmed other accounts, User:Sarsaparilla and User:Ron Duvall. This is not a judgment of my own on the situation, just a reflection that if this account is blocked, those should also be blocked. Mangojuice 16:39, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I endorse this block. I am generally not as opposed to reasonable "canvassing" as some people, but the overall pattern of contributions, particularly the last few, reflect intentionally trollish and disruptive behavior. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I also endorse; I was going to block all of these myself for abusive sockpuppetry. --jpgordon 17:14, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic. Absidy is smarter than I thought --Abd (talk) 23:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Um, what? Newyorkbrad (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, what! If he was trolling (I've talked to him and while he is embarrassed by his behavior, and he knows I don't approve (of all those Talk page droppings and of the raised finger, in particular), his boldness has apparently catalyzed two administrators to violate policy, indef blocking him essentially without warning for some quite unclear offenses. There was no sock puppetry at all, because there was no mixed usage of accounts. Canvassing was not in clear violation of policy on it (canvassing for what?), trolling is debatable; Jehochman was certainly within proper behavior to warn him about these, as he did. But not to block him, without any continued violation and given that the user declared that nothing more was going to be done like that. Jehochman elsewhere provides (in the checkuser report) strong evidence that the block was due to a perceived insult rather than to the stated reason above. I'm sure you are aware of the implications. Then Mangojuice indef blocks the other accounts, on his own initiative, even though he is clearly involved in a dispute with this user. SSP reports were filed without abusive editing (i.e., there was no overlap on the accounts, nothing was done blockworthy based on the use of multiple accounts, which were clearly not used to evade responsibility or to present an appearance of multiple editor support. I've talked with him about this, too, he had no intention of making it appear that many editors supported his ideas, and any examination of the edit history of the involved articles would confirm this. And then there is a checkuser request, filed as, essentially, a fishing expedition in a place where a few minutes examination of edit histories would have confirmed the obvious (serial account usage by one user -- he told me, in fact, that he can't access the old accounts because he shut off email for them and munged the password) -- and then, of course, me, included in the checkuser request because ... boy, I'd have to be one clever and persistent puppet master, to spend years preparing for this moment of glory. I've seen plenty of socks, they stick to me like dryer cling, but I've never seen one that looked anything like this. Couple all this with simultaneous AfD and MfD and the block of User:The Community, there is enough wikidrama for one or two days, enough to fill pages with report and comment and diffs. However, this incident is pretty dense, compared to what I've seen, you might see much less than my usual voluminous comment. Here, of course, you asked! Because there are some very important principles involved, if it is not averted somehow (unblocking him?), I'm now exercised to pursue WP:DR, step by step. Of course, please don't unblock him unless it's the right thing to do. Think it over. No emergency here: User:The Community won't be needed, if ever, for quite some time, the world can do without the article Delegable proxy for a while, though I worry about the precedent of deleting WP:PRX, it looks really, really bad. I'm in no hurry. But apparently some were. A real tearing hurry. Stop this now, before the infection spreads, they must be thinking. You know. Those Ideas Whose Name Shall Not Be Said. This was not Esperanza or AMA, but the analogy has been made from the first appearance of a Rejected tag on WP:PRX, which was immediate, before any real development of the idea. I think the connection is clear. It is not that this is Esperanza or AMA, -- it isn't -- but that some fear that any development of any kind of structure allowing the community to coherently express itself will destabilize the defacto power enjoyed by what some call the "cabal." I don't call it that, it's not that organized. It is, however, a very old phenomenon. And the fear is obviously very, very strong, nothing else would explain the vehemence which has been expressed (with Esperanza and AMA and now this). I'll say one more thing, since I think you are mature enough to understand it: The future is watching. Be careful. Good luck.--Abd (talk) 08:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

By the way, Absidy et al is a long-time Misplaced Pages user, apparently going back to 2004, my guess is roughly 10,000 edits. He hasn't requested unblock because he's concluding, it seems, that Misplaced Pages isn't worth it. He was shocked by the intensity of the response, he was not expecting to be blocked. Warned, maybe, it's in his nature to test limits, but not actually to harm. Something has gotten really, really ugly. I've seen the community bend over backward to give obviously abusive users chance after chance, even when they are actually driving newbies away. Was anyone driven away by Absidy's pranks? Who was harmed? Was he contentiously editing? If so, I've missed it. He put some strangely sourced material in an article. Blockable? Nobody had complained about it till the AfD. I see users *frequently* edit warring, insulting other editors, driving away experts by disparaging -- with no basis -- their expertise, and nothing happens even when it's clear that an administrator is watching. What's important here? The project? How? --Abd (talk) 08:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, if he didn't keep switching accounts and kept to one single account, it might have been recognizable that he's here other than for this shocking display of WP:POINT. He in fact was abusing sockpuppets, for one thing, when he supported this fringe proposal under three different usernames within two weeks, without making clear (for instance) that Sarsaparilla was the same user. Frankly, when he started the canvassing, I thought, Abd and I were both fooled - this guy is supporting Delegable proxy because he wants power on Misplaced Pages just to see if he can get it, and he's gone nuts now. When he asked ME to make him my proxy, I laughed it off as a joke. But surely he intended to piss people off. Maybe his GOAL was to irritate people in order to make them aware of the proposal, but that is still clearly disruptive. Mangojuice 12:30, 25 February 2008 (UTC)