User talk:Proof: Difference between revisions

From Test Wiki
Latest comment: 7 January 2021 by Naleksuh in topic Unblock request
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Content deleted Content added
Fast (talk | contribs)
Naleksuh (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Line 7: Line 7:
:::::Yes, I agree blocked user can request for unblock from their original talk page. But I thought the comment above is just attack under the guise of "unblock request".[[User:Q8j|Q8j]] ([[User talk:Q8j|talk]]) 20:34, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::Yes, I agree blocked user can request for unblock from their original talk page. But I thought the comment above is just attack under the guise of "unblock request".[[User:Q8j|Q8j]] ([[User talk:Q8j|talk]]) 20:34, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
:This does not appear to be a valid unblock request. Indeed as worded it suggests the exact opposite, that an [[:CommunityWiki:BanningUsers|indefinate]] [[:meatball:CommunityExile|Community Exile]] is the best path forward for all parties as nothing in the request nor your history thus far clearly evinces a desire to either conduct any testing yourself nor to facilitating testing for others, and you obviously have no intention of ever becoming a [[:meatball:CommunityMember|Community Member]]. Indeed for [[:CommunityWiki:OnlineCommunity|Online Communities]] in general and [[:meatball:WhatIsaWiki|wikis]] in particular, people whose personal agendas and actions appear to be unrelated to the communities [[:meatball:WikiMission|purpose]] are always at risk of having their privilege to contribute removed.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>Please understand that, as long as you continue to create [[:meatball:SockPuppet|sockpuppets]] for the sole purpose of hurling accusations of misbehavior/launching personal attacks/casting aspersions upon other users, that all of your edits will be reverted, all of the pages you create will be deleted, all of your accounts will be blocked, and it will take a local sysop all of 60 seconds to accomplish this (admittedly boring) task, while you waste much more of your own time to make the mess in the first place.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>No respectable wiki will block people because a random person on the internet attacks them with claims that they are racist, homophobic, or have some other personality defects. Blocks will only be issued if contributors demonstrate that behavior on the wiki, and none of our currently active contributors have such problems, or if there is strong evidence of extensive off-wiki harassment or similar undesirable behavior directed towards other users that threatens the integrity of the project, and no something that anyone can photoshop about anyone else does not count.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>If you do in fact poses solid evidence of a local contributor harassing others off-wiki, you may submit it in private via [mailto:staff@testwiki.wiki staff@testwiki.wiki].<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>Also as a word to the wise, while there is no local policy saying that the user talk pages of blocked users ''must'' only be used for requesting unblocks. Access to them may be revoked if disruptive editing occurs just as it would for any other pages, and yes repeated improperly evidenced accusations leveled by name against other contributors are disruptive. If talk page access is revoked any future appeal would also need to occur via e-mail.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>And just so things are clear, none of this has nothing to do with [[:CommunityWiki:DontHateThePlayer|you personally]], it's just a standard [[:meatball:WikiPatternLanguage|WikiPattern]], and [[:meatball:RightToLeave|you are free to leave at anytime]]. Regards, [[User:Fast|Fast - ZoomZoom]] ([[User talk:Fast|talk]]) 01:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
:This does not appear to be a valid unblock request. Indeed as worded it suggests the exact opposite, that an [[:CommunityWiki:BanningUsers|indefinate]] [[:meatball:CommunityExile|Community Exile]] is the best path forward for all parties as nothing in the request nor your history thus far clearly evinces a desire to either conduct any testing yourself nor to facilitating testing for others, and you obviously have no intention of ever becoming a [[:meatball:CommunityMember|Community Member]]. Indeed for [[:CommunityWiki:OnlineCommunity|Online Communities]] in general and [[:meatball:WhatIsaWiki|wikis]] in particular, people whose personal agendas and actions appear to be unrelated to the communities [[:meatball:WikiMission|purpose]] are always at risk of having their privilege to contribute removed.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>Please understand that, as long as you continue to create [[:meatball:SockPuppet|sockpuppets]] for the sole purpose of hurling accusations of misbehavior/launching personal attacks/casting aspersions upon other users, that all of your edits will be reverted, all of the pages you create will be deleted, all of your accounts will be blocked, and it will take a local sysop all of 60 seconds to accomplish this (admittedly boring) task, while you waste much more of your own time to make the mess in the first place.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>No respectable wiki will block people because a random person on the internet attacks them with claims that they are racist, homophobic, or have some other personality defects. Blocks will only be issued if contributors demonstrate that behavior on the wiki, and none of our currently active contributors have such problems, or if there is strong evidence of extensive off-wiki harassment or similar undesirable behavior directed towards other users that threatens the integrity of the project, and no something that anyone can photoshop about anyone else does not count.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>If you do in fact poses solid evidence of a local contributor harassing others off-wiki, you may submit it in private via [mailto:staff@testwiki.wiki staff@testwiki.wiki].<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>Also as a word to the wise, while there is no local policy saying that the user talk pages of blocked users ''must'' only be used for requesting unblocks. Access to them may be revoked if disruptive editing occurs just as it would for any other pages, and yes repeated improperly evidenced accusations leveled by name against other contributors are disruptive. If talk page access is revoked any future appeal would also need to occur via e-mail.<div style="margin-top:.5em"></div>And just so things are clear, none of this has nothing to do with [[:CommunityWiki:DontHateThePlayer|you personally]], it's just a standard [[:meatball:WikiPatternLanguage|WikiPattern]], and [[:meatball:RightToLeave|you are free to leave at anytime]]. Regards, [[User:Fast|Fast - ZoomZoom]] ([[User talk:Fast|talk]]) 01:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
: {{ping|Fast}} I can confirm that Cocopuff2018 has made comments in #wikipedia-en that were seen by others as homophobic and was banned by a channel operator due to it. However, if [[User:Proof]] wants to raise a concern about [[User:Cocopuff2018]], they can do so without sockpuppetry as that will certainly not be taken seriously. [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User talk:Naleksuh|talk]]) 07:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:21, 7 January 2021

Unblock request

@Naleksuh: As Naleksuh requested I am using my original account as to not be considered a "sock" account. Why is my material being hidden? And why is everyone just staying silent about (redacted) being homophobic and not blocking him? Does this wiki really tolerate homophobic users? That's insane, it's a hate crime. Could some please just explain the logic behind not blocking (redacted) (a homophobic person with irrefutable evidence to back that up) but hiding my revisions, when all I've done is show proof that (redacted) is homophobic? I just want to understand honestly, I've not insulted anyone on this wiki and I will not do so as my only purpose is to expose (redacted) for who he is: a unapologetic homophobe. He can't just get away with that he's hurt a immeasurable amount of people with his homophobic statements and it has to stop. If he doesn't get block he will just think it is okay to be homophobic and IT IS NOT. Proof (talk) 08:23, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Also if another admin other than Naleksuh reads this, please don't delete it, let him read it please. Proof (talk) 08:24, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Q8j: This user appears to have requested unblock from their original account, so why have you revision deleted their request and pulled talk page access? I do not see any evidence of block evasion when they were requesting from their original account and the original blocking sysop had talk page access enabled. Naleksuh (talk) 19:28, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Naleksuh:his(her) opinion above((redacted) being...) is repeated many times with his sockpuppets, and most(all?) of them are hidden. I thought it can be libel/personal attack, and therefore hid that.--Q8j (talk) 20:14, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
I for one have not investigated the validity of the user's claims, I was simply procedurally blocking them for block evasion. If they are indeed requesting from their original account, I would see no problem with them requesting unblock. Naleksuh (talk) 20:26, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I agree blocked user can request for unblock from their original talk page. But I thought the comment above is just attack under the guise of "unblock request".Q8j (talk) 20:34, 6 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
This does not appear to be a valid unblock request. Indeed as worded it suggests the exact opposite, that an indefinate Community Exile is the best path forward for all parties as nothing in the request nor your history thus far clearly evinces a desire to either conduct any testing yourself nor to facilitating testing for others, and you obviously have no intention of ever becoming a Community Member. Indeed for Online Communities in general and wikis in particular, people whose personal agendas and actions appear to be unrelated to the communities purpose are always at risk of having their privilege to contribute removed.
Please understand that, as long as you continue to create sockpuppets for the sole purpose of hurling accusations of misbehavior/launching personal attacks/casting aspersions upon other users, that all of your edits will be reverted, all of the pages you create will be deleted, all of your accounts will be blocked, and it will take a local sysop all of 60 seconds to accomplish this (admittedly boring) task, while you waste much more of your own time to make the mess in the first place.
No respectable wiki will block people because a random person on the internet attacks them with claims that they are racist, homophobic, or have some other personality defects. Blocks will only be issued if contributors demonstrate that behavior on the wiki, and none of our currently active contributors have such problems, or if there is strong evidence of extensive off-wiki harassment or similar undesirable behavior directed towards other users that threatens the integrity of the project, and no something that anyone can photoshop about anyone else does not count.
If you do in fact poses solid evidence of a local contributor harassing others off-wiki, you may submit it in private via staff@testwiki.wiki.
Also as a word to the wise, while there is no local policy saying that the user talk pages of blocked users must only be used for requesting unblocks. Access to them may be revoked if disruptive editing occurs just as it would for any other pages, and yes repeated improperly evidenced accusations leveled by name against other contributors are disruptive. If talk page access is revoked any future appeal would also need to occur via e-mail.
And just so things are clear, none of this has nothing to do with you personally, it's just a standard WikiPattern, and you are free to leave at anytime. Regards, Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 01:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Fast: I can confirm that Cocopuff2018 has made comments in #wikipedia-en that were seen by others as homophobic and was banned by a channel operator due to it. However, if User:Proof wants to raise a concern about User:Cocopuff2018, they can do so without sockpuppetry as that will certainly not be taken seriously. Naleksuh (talk) 07:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)Reply