Jump to content

User talk:Benson Verazzano

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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).

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

Request reason:

It says I'm blocked because I'm a sockpuppet of a retired user called Gregory Clegg? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gregory_Clegg I think there's some mistake... I'm not Gregory Clegg and don't know anyone by that name.

Decline reason:

This is a checkuser confirmed block. Unless you have some way to explain why eight accounts are all running from the same system, I believe this block will stand. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:12, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

This appears to be a checkuser block, meaning that someone with Checkuser priveleges checked your IP and found that it matched one Greg Clegg used. I hate to say that such blocks usually do not get overturned. -Jeremy (v^_^v Cardmaker) 07:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The following appear to be the same person:

  1. Benson Verazzano (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  2. Consensus is not truth (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  3. Won't Last Long (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  4. Smeggly C. Badde (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  5. Gregory Clegg (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  6. TheThankful (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  7. Melchiord (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  8. DunkinDonutBoy (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Unless you have some other explanation of the relationship between these accounts... – Luna Santin (talk) 07:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eight accounts?
1. Gregory Clegg is retired. How can anyone be Gregory Clegg's sockpuppet?
2. Melchiord posted what looks like a year or so before Gregory Clegg. If anyone is a sock, Greg is a sock of Melchiord not the other way around.
3. Won't last long has one contribution: retiring Clegg, then nothing.
4. Smeggly C. Badde has NO contributions! Nothing! How can he be a sock? He hasn't done anything!
5. Consensus is not truth was blocked for a username issue before contributing.
Which leaves TheThankful and myself and Dunkin Donut Boy.
There are many possible reasons other than sockpuppetry.
Seeing as such a hoohar was made over the so-called "outing" of Mathsci issue, I'm not prepared to speak about my situation other than offer possible alternatives.
a) Meatpuppets: Friends or guests
b) Multiple users in the same apartment/house
c) People piggybacking off a users nonpassworded wifi.
d) One or two were sockpuppets, and one or two were not.
What I will state unequivocally is that my name is not Gregory Clegg, and I do not know anyone by that name.
I also know for a fact, that I am not the only person who uses this internet connection.
Additionally, as far as I can see, none of these other users have ever contributed in any of my topics, nor at all while I've been a member. How is that sockpuppetry?
What happens when the current 6 month block on my IP address is over? Is anyone who ever registers on this connection doomed to be labeled a sockpuppet? Even if, like me, they're the only user posting from it? Will I ever be able to contribute to Wikipedia again? --Benson Verazzano (talk) 05:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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).

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

Request reason:

It has been 16 months since my 6 month ban. And my alleged sock, Gregory Clegg, has been long retired. May I please be unblocked? Thanks! Benson.

Decline reason:

You are not banned for six months, but blocked indefinitely, and you do not address the reasons for that block.  Sandstein  10:22, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, I'm not sure how I am not addressing the reasons for the block. Please explain! I have one account: Benson Verazzano. I would simply like to be able to contribute to Wikipedia. I have been blocked for 16 months now because other accounts used this internet connection? But from what I see, none of the other accounts are even being used! Gregory Clegg is retired. I don't see how I can be a sockpuppet of a retired user. Please elaborate further on how I can address this issue in a manner where you find it acceptable to allow me to contribute, otherwise this seems like an inescapable black hole. Please note, I did not just create a new user account and try and edit: which would have been creating a sockpuppet, yes? I've done what I understand to be the right thing, and appealed the block. Help! Benson

Decline reason:

Accounts do not have to be simultaneously active to be considered sockmaster and puppet. If you were trying to follow the "clean start under a new name" provision, you have not done it correctly. The way to handle this, given that Checkuser has confirmed this, is to tell us that you will use one account and stick to it and disclose all other accounts you have created, regardless of whether we were aware of them already or not. And accept that you will not only be blocked but formally banned if you sock again. — Daniel Case (talk) 15:38, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I read that link Daniel, thanks. I found this clause:

"If editors share a personal computer or an Internet connection, or use a public computer or shared network, their accounts may be linked by CheckUser. To avoid accusations of sock puppetry, users in that position should declare the connection on their user pages."

I have said, that there are multiple internet users on this connection. I use a non-password-protected WiFi in a high density part of a very big city.

So, let's just assume that I'm stating I use the same internet connection as Gregory Clegg or Melchiord or whoever else is using it.

Can you not just open my account on a sort of probation? Open to periodic checkuser checks or whatever?

Decline reason:

We consider other things besides the IP when deciding whether two users are improperly related. — Daniel Case (talk) 16:54, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.

.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Benson_Verazzano&oldid=1144102191"