User talk:Roxanne Harman

I will only make genuine edits using this account. --Roxanne Harman 16:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet you claimed to be an account that has made thousands of vandal edits. How can we trust you? I always like to assume good faith but you don't exactly have a great record -- Tawker 05:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Tawker. I'm a big fan of assuming good faith, and I'd like to think that you can become a productive contributor, but I think many in the community would be very wary of you being unblocked. What's made you change your mind about Wikipedia? Where do you feel you can contribute best? moink 05:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't fair. She hasn't done any vandalism with this account and says that she isn't going to. The only contribution she made that wasn't on her userpage was on someone's talk page and it seemed to indicate that she was done with the willy thing. I don't think she ever claimed to be done with any of her sock puppets, but now she is making that claim. If she starts vandalizing with this account, then we know in the future not to trust this claim, but for now we should assume good faith. -LambaJan 22:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then why would she advertise to be a vandal. If she had just created a normal account and didn't claim to be on wheels there would be no block right now. I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you there, advertising to be a vandal even gloating about being a vandal is an block in my books -- Tawker 00:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever... — Mar. 7, '06 [00:29] <freakofnur_xture|talk>

I wasn't the original Willy On Wheels, but I did make edits as:

William on Round Objects (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Solar-S (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I know who the originator of this is, but it is not me! --Roxanne Harman 15:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roxanne, why did you change your story? On your user page you said you were willy and all of those sockpuppets; now you're saying you weren't willy and you were only 2 sockpuppets. I overlooked this before because I was really emotional that the authorities of an encyclopedia would act in a manner that encourages lying. Now I'm looking at this and am wondering whether or not I should continue to advocate for you. I can't continue simply because their actions are wrong. I need to know that if by some chance your block is lifted you will act in the same manner I'm admonishing them to. Please enlighten me. -LambaJan 12:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawker, it wasn't a gloat. It was phrased as an account. She was coming clean about her involvement in this mess so that she can associate in the wiki community with this behind her so that she doesn't have to feel like she's hiding something. Denying her this account, one that committed no acts of vandalism, simply because she told the truth on this matter is just that -punishing someone for telling the truth.

Her admission revealed an important bit of information, that Willy on Wheels is actually a group of people. All of the WoW vandal accounts were unabashadly vandal accounts and of all that I looked at none of them made a claim that the accounts would only be used for genuine edits, as this one does. This is unprecedented and deserves closer and more resonable consideration than simply blocking by association. It's like you're a company owner and a few of your employees call in sick so that they can go to the beach, and you fire the one who freely admits it. What did that do? It rewarded lying and removed a worker who had a very valuable and useful (not to mention increasingly rare) character quality from your workforce, thereby cheapening the quality of work that your force is capable of. Having editors who have the integrity to be truthful even when it makes them look bad is something that is highly valuable in the venture of putting together an encyclopedia. -LambaJan 19:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing your argument (and it pop up on my watchlist to remind me to have a look) LambaJan slightly changes my POV, I'm willing to suggest an closely monitored unblock, however I have no juristiction in the matter and these words might not be worth the hard drive they're stored on. If we're "voting" on this block I support a closely monitored (aka blacklisted in the IRC bots (no offense, but its better than no access at all) unblock and we can see if bad can come to good. Perhaps this user might have some suggestions on how to defeat WoWo. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tawker (talk • contribs) 19:36, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Willy on Wheels, I am huntin' you down. And I will find you someday on Wikipedia. Be prepared to be captured by the Quick Response Vandalism Squad. You are not going to elude us this time. General Eisenhower 21:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]