User talk:SafelyAnonymous

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for sock puppetry, meat puppetry or single purpose. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Prolog (talk) 04:18, 14 June 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Reporting potential sock puppets has suddenly become a blocking offense? Or just reporting sock puppets of William M. Connolley? I have done nothing wrong and I should be unblocked. I note that Prolog has also deleted my SPI request. Is he allowed to do that when I have done nothing wrong? I wish to have this matter reviewed at WP:AN. If you won't unblock me at least raise this issue there as there is no basis in policy for having blocked me in this manner.

Decline reason:

Whose sock are you? For what its worth, the accounts you wanted checks on have all been blocked indefinitely. Syrthiss (talk) 15:06, 14 June 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.

For what its worth, the accounts you wanted checks on have all been blocked indefinitely...

And what of the suspected sock master? Has he been investigated and/or blocked? --SafelyAnonymous (talk) 21:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Prolog (talk) 22:31, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I was trying to tell you before, I think you've fingered the wrong man, Sherlock. Perhaps you owe poor GoRight an apology for your false accusations and now you'll take me seriously and look into the obvious person based on WP:DUCK? --SafelyAnonymous (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure who that would be, considering the report from the checkuser. I suspect the one-armed man. Syrthiss (talk) 11:53, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]