User talk:Loaded Question?

Loaded Question?, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Loaded Question?! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for being an obvious sock of a blocked user, returning to harass an opponent..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 15:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

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).

Loaded Question? (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Experience or associated privileges shouldn't be misguidedly interpreted as a reason for default acquiescence from other members, and no Wikipedian is above any other Wikipedian. Do not call newcomers disparaging names such as "sockpuppet" or "meatpuppet". Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers. I am not apologetic for advancing Wikipedia:Purpose & User:Jimbo_Wales/Statement_of_principles & Wikipedia is not a battle ground & WP:UNINVOLVED. Loaded Question? (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Obvious sock is obvious. Removing talk page access. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

---

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.

Backup: Work in progress

Main article: Sunflower Student Movement

Background

The campaigners published a book entitled 《The keywords that overshadow this ghost island - Taiwan, in which they accused politics of Taiwan of leaning towards Capitalists

The last straw

On March 17 2014, Taiwan's ruling Kuomintang (KMT) attempted a unilateral move in the Legislative Yuan to force the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement (CSSTA) to the legislative floor without giving it a clause-by-clause review as previously established in a June 2013 agreement with the opposing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Previously, in September 2013, the two parties had agreed to hold 16 public hearings over the details of the trade agreement with academics, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and representatives of trade sectors impacted by the agreement. The KMT had chaired eight public hearings within a week, and several members of social groups, NGOs, and business representatives from impacted industries were either not invited or were informed at the last minute. When academics and business sector representatives gave their opinions at the hearings, the presiding chair of the legislature's Internal Administrative Committee, KMT legislator Chang Ching-chung, said the agreement had to be adopted in its entirety and could not be amended. Legislative gridlock followed, as the opposing DPP had not completed the eight hearings they had agreed to chair by March 17. Chang, citing Article 61 of the Legislative Yuan Functions Act, announced that the review process had gone beyond the 90 days allotted for review. The agreement, in the KMT's view, should therefore be considered reviewed and should be submitted to a plenary session on March 21 for a final vote.