This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zer0faults (talk | contribs) at 10:00, 12 June 2006 (→RFC). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 10:00, 12 June 2006 by Zer0faults (talk | contribs) (→RFC)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
|
|
- Archive: /LJS All comments related to vandal LJS and socks
- Archive: /Merecat All comments related to vandal Merecat and socks
- Archive: /Misc Misc obsolete comments
Response
No problem with the cleanup, everybody's userpage is a valuable resource here. ;-) I just stummbled across the message on your userpage when I was following a users contributions, so I moved it. Hope I didn't do anything I wasn't supposed to do. ;-) Cheers! DGX 23:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Wishing you well
Vandal blocked
You were correct on page TdF/John316. Confirmed: User:Wombdpsw has been identified as a notorious vandal using many usernames before, such as "Merecat" and "Rex071404". He's been blocked indefinitely. (see userpages or clerk's report) -- ActiveSelective 06:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Possible Sock?
I just found this on this page. Followed up the IP address, only one other contribution today and not on an article I edited. Looks to me as if Merecat or an accomplice is back to his old tricks and this is meant to provide 'evidence' in one of his future attacks under his new nym. --Gorgonzilla 22:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- Your test didn't work. Your vandalism has been reverted. In the future use the sandbox for such nonsense. --138.162.5.8 20:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
RFC
I removed your comments as you put them in the wrong place, you do not get to comment in that area. I also find it interesting that you choose to comment on my RFC even though I have had no contact with you and neither has any of the other users. How did you even find the RFC? --zero faults 17:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Just to keep you updated. Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_checkuser#Merecat. I hope you do the responcible thins now that this has been put to bed finally. --zero faults 10:55, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- So you changed your ISP. So what? Even if you are a different person you are just as obnoxious, just as committed to POV peddling and use exactly the same tactics including the tendentious legalistic justifications. Your approach to the RFC makes it clear that it is only a matter of time before the matter gets to Arbcon. --Gorgonzilla 15:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- I was hoping you would apologize for your accusations that have been proven false, however I see that will not happen. I do remind you WP:NPA. --zero faults 16:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- They have not been proven false, all that has been established is that you have worked out how to do sockpuppetry without leaving obvious clues. Your repeated unsubstantiated claims of exhoneration are laughable. --Gorgonzilla 18:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- I was hoping you would apologize for your accusations that have been proven false, however I see that will not happen. I do remind you WP:NPA. --zero faults 16:13, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
May I suggest a truce? Gorgon, you can't prove Zero is a sock, and Zero can't prove he is not (can't prove a negative). Instead of beating eachother on the head could you at least accept you have reached a stalemate? Of course, you can continue the sock discussion, but frankly, at this point it is starting to look like a oneway ticket to ArbCom. I don't think that is what we as Wikipedians want. Let's try and work together on this project. This is only a suggestion, but I hope the 2 of you can get past this conflict. Nomen Nescio 18:44, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- I have to agree with Nescio. I cannot disprove a negative but I have gone out of my way to show according to Misplaced Pages I am not a sockpuppet. However I am no longer going to argue with you over it, the people who handle sockpuppet claims have spoken, and your opinion will remain what it is no matter what they say. --zero faults 19:36, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
At this point, I don't really think it makes much difference if Zer0fault's really is a sockpuppet of Rex or not. A bad editor is a bad editor. Regardless of whether or not Zero is a sockpuppet of Rex or merely copycatting Rex's tactics. -- Mr. Tibbs 06:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- An RfC is about fixing our differences, considering this comment it does not appear as though that is what you were hoping to do by certifying the RfC, so this comment will be noted on it. --zero faults 10:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)