User talk:WillNever
August 2010
[edit]
{{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
WillNever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
SarekofVulcan has blocked me on entirely false pretenses. A simple IP check will reveal that "Tessmage" and myself are posting from significantly different locations. I am a simple member of Tessmage's website... not that user himself. So in no way is this an "apparent block evasion." It's not a block evasion at all. This is my only account on wikipedia and I have NEVER been blocked. Rather, I am now being blocked because I agree with another user's views so the administrator decided that we must be the same person. This kind of knee-jerk blocking of innocent users hampers the site's credibility GREATLY.
Decline reason:
Meat puppets, user that edit on behalf of users that were blocked in order to support the agenda of the blocked user are treated the same as if they were actually the same user as it amounts to block evasion by proxy. Keeping out people who push a certain point of view and enforcing our core policies is intended to improve our credibility. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2010 (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.
- Nice try, Tessera. And it's interesting that you're claiming to never have been blocked before when you've been editing for a whole day.... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- You might also review our policies on meatpuppetry, as well - many editors who edit on behalf of one editor may be considered as one editor for the purposes of sanctions, such as this one. So, even if you aren't Tessmage, editing on their behalf opens you up to their sanctions. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 16:56, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
WillNever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Couple things: First, to Sarek, why are you addressing me as Tessera, when we are posting from verifiably separate IP addresses? That is dishonest of you. Secondly, I am not guilty of "meat puppetry" for the reason that I am not posting on Tessera's behalf. I am one of many users on his board, yes, but I was not bidden to post here by him and the opinions expressed here are my own. With meat puppetry discounted, the only remaining possibility is that the *actual* basis upon which you are operating is that nobody is allowed to express any opinions which are similar to the opinions of someone else who was banned. There's another term for that: intellectual fascism. You are being intolerant of views and opinions that others have been banned for, even if the person stating those views hasn't actually broken any rules. For that reason, you are certainly damaging the credibility and neutrality of this site. That is a shame.
Decline reason:
No, the *actual basis* for your block is the one stated in your block log. Blaming "intellectual fascism" will not get your block lifted. Any future unblock requests will need to address your behavior only in order to be considered. TNXMan 19:56, 25 August 2010 (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.
WillNever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The basis stated in the block log is that I am Tessmage trying to evade a ban, or that I am a "sock puppet" posting for Tessera. Would I be correct in that that is the basis for which I have been blocked? If so, no actual evidence exists to suggest I am Tessera on an alternate account, besides the obvious fact that we share a similar viewpoint. That we have verifiably different IP addresses proves we are not one person. As to being a "sock puppet," that implies that I am posting *for* Tessera because he is unable to. Other than that I have an account on his website, there isn't any actual basis for you making that assumption. And it *is* an unproven assumption. The logic behind my banning is as so: "WillNever has an account on banned user Tessmage's website. WillNever made edits that seem motivated by the same reasons banned user Tessmage made edits. Therefore, WillNever's posts constitute an evasion Tessmage's block, even though WillNever posted on his own volition and without any encouragement from Tessmage. If you have another theory behind this blocking, I would very much like to hear it because right now this is looking bad... very bad.
Decline reason:
Sorry, this is the exact situation the meatpuppetry policy was designed to mitigate. I'm sure an unblock could be arranged if you're interested in editing other areas, but you may not continued to act as a proxy for a blocked editor. I'm sorry if you feel this is "bad"; we feel it leads to less abusable process. Kuru (talk) 22:03, 25 August 2010 (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.
I will put this more simply. What actual rule have I broken? Meatpuppetry has been cited. According to this site, meatpuppetry is the recruiting of a new editor to post changes on the behalf of a blocked user. For one thing, I am not a new user. The *account* is new, but you will find edits coming from my IP address that go a few weeks back in several unrelated articles. I just figured it was a convenient time to create an actual account yesterday... and since Sarek is the one who banned me, while continuing to believe that I am Tessera (does he simply refuse to acknowledge our differing IPs?), the block is something of a sham. You say that future requests must address my behavior only. My behavior is editing a page in the interest of neutrality... then getting blocked because another user, who was blocked for other reasons, did something similar. The logic doesn't follow.
WillNever (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I cannot be a "proxy" for a blocked editor unless I am purposefully posting at the behest or encouragement of the blocked editor, not because I just happen to share similar viewpoints and wanted to voice them as well, on my steam. Would you consider me a "proxy" still, if I were not a member who uses the same message board as him? Probably not... which is why, distilled down, the blocking is ultimately an excercise in "collateral damage" to me. Since you have stated that that a unblock could be arranged if I returned to editing other areas, then I will make that agreement. I will continue editing the unrelated areas that I usually visit and not be what is, in your estimation, a proxy to Tessmage on the VTMB page.
Decline reason:
Assuming you are not Tessera, you are a proxy for a blocked user, and you have been purposefully posting at the behest and encouragement of said blocked user – another attempt to try and control the article to you folks' likings. This is now nothing more than an abuse of the unblock process, and hence I am revoking your ability to edit this talk page. Regards, –MuZemike 22:22, 25 August 2010 (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.