User talk:Nothughthomas: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 03:47, 3 January 2010 editTbsdy lives (talk \| contribs)7,977 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit		Revision as of 03:48, 3 January 2010 edit undoTbsdy lives (talk \| contribs)7,977 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 16:		Line 16:
	:::::I am now informing you that you are using the template inappropriately. This is really to be used for editors who are new to Misplaced Pages to ask specific questions about the project to assist with editing article - it is not to be used in the way you are using it here. Do not readd it. - ] (formerly ]) <sup>]</sup> 22:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)		:::::I am now informing you that you are using the template inappropriately. This is really to be used for editors who are new to Misplaced Pages to ask specific questions about the project to assist with editing article - it is not to be used in the way you are using it here. Do not readd it. - ] (formerly ]) <sup>]</sup> 22:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
	::::::As this is a situation that involves you directly it's not really appropriate for you to make edits to my talk page. It is hard for me to AGF in light of this. If you want to go to discussion and notice boards and lobby to anyone who will listen that my behavior is "becoming more bizarre" as part of your effort to get me banned that is your business. Please don't bring it here. I have asked you previously not to make edits to my Talk page. The fact that you are persisting to do it even after this request evidences the lack of AGF in the lie you spread about me: ''The user has now admitted that they have added the unblock template to their talk page six times.''Thank you. ] (]) 00:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)		::::::As this is a situation that involves you directly it's not really appropriate for you to make edits to my talk page. It is hard for me to AGF in light of this. If you want to go to discussion and notice boards and lobby to anyone who will listen that my behavior is "becoming more bizarre" as part of your effort to get me banned that is your business. Please don't bring it here. I have asked you previously not to make edits to my Talk page. The fact that you are persisting to do it even after this request evidences the lack of AGF in the lie you spread about me: ''The user has now admitted that they have added the unblock template to their talk page six times.''Thank you. ] (]) 00:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
	:::::::Apologies, I thought you had said that you had tried to use the unblock template 6 times in the . I was mistaken - however, given that you keep blanking your talk page I got a bit confused. Have you considered archiving comments? Please also understand that your talk page is how we can communicate with you directly, as with almost all areas of Misplaced Pages people have a right to leave civil messages. You may not issue a decree that stops them from doing this. - ] (formerly ]) <sup>]</sup> 03:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)		:::::::Apologies, I thought you had said that you had tried to use the unblock template 6 times in the . I was mistaken - however, given that you keep blanking your talk page I got a bit confused. Have you considered archiving comments? Please also understand that your talk page is how we can communicate with you directly, as with almost all areas of Misplaced Pages people have a right to edit the page, in the case of user talk pages they may leave civil messages. You may not issue a decree that stops them from doing this. - ] (formerly ]) <sup>]</sup> 03:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

	{{unblock reviewed\|1=With all due respect to ] I believe the valued mod may have stumbled into a deep situation, or been directly contacted by ] about a deep situation and briefed only incrementally - about which they are not fully aware. I'd implore anyone to please fully read the discussion that occurred here and take my defensive posture as reasonable under the circumstances. Further, I earnestly request aid and assistance from any so-inclined mod as I am clearly being overwhelmed with "retribution" attacks by two mods after a decision they made became very unpopular and they were frantic about the reaction to it. While I respect the right of mods to make unpopular decisions we can't allow them to stifle debate or discussion about those decisions when they feel they're "backed into a corner." It is inappropriate to use my relative novice WP status, and ensuing inability to launch a cohesive defense for myself, as a way to effectively "off" me through wikilawyer tactics and multiple backdoor complaints against me (none of which I've been informed about) until they can get one to 'stick.' Please see full threads here: '''Misplaced Pages:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#Result'''\|decline=Citing the behavior of others and making oblique accusations does not justify your ]. Please read ], and in future edit in a more collaborative spirit. You may also wish to consider the policy ] - ] <small>(])</small> 08:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)}}		{{unblock reviewed\|1=With all due respect to ] I believe the valued mod may have stumbled into a deep situation, or been directly contacted by ] about a deep situation and briefed only incrementally - about which they are not fully aware. I'd implore anyone to please fully read the discussion that occurred here and take my defensive posture as reasonable under the circumstances. Further, I earnestly request aid and assistance from any so-inclined mod as I am clearly being overwhelmed with "retribution" attacks by two mods after a decision they made became very unpopular and they were frantic about the reaction to it. While I respect the right of mods to make unpopular decisions we can't allow them to stifle debate or discussion about those decisions when they feel they're "backed into a corner." It is inappropriate to use my relative novice WP status, and ensuing inability to launch a cohesive defense for myself, as a way to effectively "off" me through wikilawyer tactics and multiple backdoor complaints against me (none of which I've been informed about) until they can get one to 'stick.' Please see full threads here: '''Misplaced Pages:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#Result'''\|decline=Citing the behavior of others and making oblique accusations does not justify your ]. Please read ], and in future edit in a more collaborative spirit. You may also wish to consider the policy ] - ] <small>(])</small> 08:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)}}

Revision as of 03:48, 3 January 2010

PLEASE HELP ME, THERE IS SOMETHING FISHY ABOUT User: Tbsdy lives. I'm just a poor, ~~elderly~~ nicely seasoned grandmother and don't know what else to do; I'm in a state of complete mental shock. This user is making patently and verifiably untrue noticeboard comments about me in an effort to get me perma-banned. Please read background below. (Regrettably, as I am currently blocked I can't file an appropriate noticeboard action, which I'm certain this user is/was counting on, so had to engage in grandstanding Talk page posting in order to try to draw mod attention here to read this message; an unfortunate state-of-affairs).

Summary -

I added two unblock requests; my initial issue and then a reframe/appeal of my issue.
During my block, User: Tbsdy lives posted several combative notes on my Talk page which prompted me to request he stop posting here.
After above conflagration with Tbsdy lives, he then went to noticeboards and stated, regarding me: The user has now admitted that they have added the unblock template to their talk page six times. Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Nothughthomas
Since no such thing was ever stated by me, nor in fact ever happened as the logs show, we have to assume this was a vendetta lie by Tbsdy lives to secure my perma-ban. He did this during a period when he knew I am not able to respond to defend myself due to my 24-hour block.
Posting an intentional lie, that can be disproven by a simple log review, about another user is beyond WP:CIVIL violation; as an effort to get a user banned it is a serious breach of rules at the highest level. I am now in serious jeopardy of being permanently banned if an overworked mod happens to see this users note and assumes its accuracy without further investigation.

I have blanked my Talk page to draw attention to this note. Note: There is a larger strangeness/suspicion issue with this user, but other contributors better equipped than me are currently compiling evidence on that so I limit my alert to this one transgression for now. Nothughthomas (talk) 13:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC) {{helpme}}

Hi there. Unfortunately, you will have to raise this concern with an administrator. The users monitoring the {{helpme}} requests are not admins and cannot help you with this issue. If you feel there is something worth investigating, you may wish to request an administrator unblock you so that you can make an appropriate notice at WP:RFC or WP:ANI for discussion. However, as I note that you've already tried to get unblocked twice, you will need to be very clear in your intentions to convince the administrator that your unblocking is warranted. Thanks. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 20:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to comment. I don't want to post another unblock request because I feel that would be abusing the system as I've already posted two. My hope is a kind fellow contributor will be sufficiently aghast at this effort to get me perma-banned by making a clearly non-AGF untrue statement on noticeboards, and concerned about the motivations and intent of the user in question on wikipedia, that they raise a red flag to an admin. Nothughthomas (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Please do not forum shop. If you truly want to be unblocked, either use an unblock request or email unblock-en-l

wikimedia.org. The helpme template is inappropriate to use in this scenario. Killiondude (talk) 20:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not asking to be unblocked. I have replaced the /helpme/ tag because your word choice indicates there's a possibility you may not have read what I wrote. I would like to request any user coming here take a moment to please read my statement above before editing my talk page. Thank you. Nothughthomas (talk) 22:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I am now informing you that you are using the template inappropriately. This is really to be used for editors who are new to Misplaced Pages to ask specific questions about the project to assist with editing article - it is not to be used in the way you are using it here. Do not readd it. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 22:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

As this is a situation that involves you directly it's not really appropriate for you to make edits to my talk page. It is hard for me to AGF in light of this. If you want to go to discussion and notice boards and lobby to anyone who will listen that my behavior is "becoming more bizarre" as part of your effort to get me banned that is your business. Please don't bring it here. I have asked you previously not to make edits to my Talk page. The fact that you are persisting to do it even after this request evidences the lack of AGF in the lie you spread about me: The user has now admitted that they have added the unblock template to their talk page six times.Thank you. Nothughthomas (talk) 00:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, I thought you had said that you had tried to use the unblock template 6 times in the following edit. I was mistaken - however, given that you keep blanking your talk page I got a bit confused. Have you considered archiving comments? Please also understand that your talk page is how we can communicate with you directly, as with almost all areas of Misplaced Pages people have a right to edit the page, in the case of user talk pages they may leave civil messages. You may not issue a decree that stops them from doing this. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) 03:47, 3 January 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

With all due respect to MZMcBride I believe the valued mod may have stumbled into a deep situation, or been directly contacted by User:Lar about a deep situation and briefed only incrementally - about which they are not fully aware. I'd implore anyone to please fully read the discussion that occurred here and take my defensive posture as reasonable under the circumstances. Further, I earnestly request aid and assistance from any so-inclined mod as I am clearly being overwhelmed with "retribution" attacks by two mods after a decision they made became very unpopular and they were frantic about the reaction to it. While I respect the right of mods to make unpopular decisions we can't allow them to stifle debate or discussion about those decisions when they feel they're "backed into a corner." It is inappropriate to use my relative novice WP status, and ensuing inability to launch a cohesive defense for myself, as a way to effectively "off" me through wikilawyer tactics and multiple backdoor complaints against me (none of which I've been informed about) until they can get one to 'stick.' Please see full threads here: Misplaced Pages:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#Result

Decline reason:

Citing the behavior of others and making oblique accusations does not justify your disruptive editing. Please read Misplaced Pages:Guide to appealing blocks, and in future edit in a more collaborative spirit. You may also wish to consider the policy WP:NOTBATTLEGROUND - 2/0 (cont.) 08:24, 2 January 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.

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

Request reason:

I want to jazz-up my user page. I have no new information or arguments to make. If someone unblocks me I will not edit anything except my user page for 24 hours. I do not consider this as acknowledgment of any wrongdoing on my part and continue to consider the entire block inappropriate, petty, vindictive and evidence of hatred toward people with minority/disability status, however, in interest of efficacy I am willing to agree to no edits outside my user page for 24 hours in exchange for a block lift. Nothughthomas (talk) 10:57, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Decline reason:

No, you are not blocked for edits outside your user page, you are blocked for disruption, and you do not get it. The tone of this request (see also WP:NOTTHEM) indicates that a longer, not a shorter, block is needed to prevent the recurrence of the conduct for which you were correctly blocked. Any more requests in this vein may lead to an extended or indefinite block. Sandstein 11:01, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar

I can't think of any one that I'd want to be awarded more than that one. TheGoodLocust (talk) 01:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)