This is an old revision of this page, as edited by PoolGuy (talk | contribs) at 06:34, 1 June 2006 (Comment on decisions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 06:34, 1 June 2006 by PoolGuy (talk | contribs) (Comment on decisions)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Multiple Accounts
Based upon the evidence the creation of many multiple accounts cited in the case was the result of Administrative blocking, not an effort for disruption. The multiple accounts, as presented, were only established to get a response to the basis of Administrative action against GoldToeMarionette. Had the response ever been delivered, further inquiries would not have been needed. It appears that the non-response, and incessant Administrative action created the perceived disruption. I don't think multiple accounts in and of themselves should be viewed as disruptive, there is a tremendous amount of context caused by other parties. PoolGuy 06:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)