Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nothughthomas (talk | contribs) at 11:13, 2 January 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

IMPORTANT NOTE FOR MODS COMING HERE TO ISSUE BANS/BLOCKS ... Sanctioning me for 'disruptive editing' without the ability to actually cite an of 'disruptive editing' by me with a specific link, but merely "there's something fishy about you" (or, my FAV, "disruptive editing!" followed by deafening silence when a request for an example of the "disruptive editing" is requested), earns permanent archiving and addition to the below LOL FUNNIES section for the enjoyment and amusement of all wikipedia. Thank you. Nothughthomas (talk) 09:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

IMPORTANT NOTE FOR EVERYONE I am female, so stop calling me "him" or "he." Nothughthomas (talk) 11:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for a chuckle

Very droll! I'm glad we've been able to make some progress with that article. -- ChrisO (talk) 02:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Climate Change sanctions (permanently retained on Talk page due to amusing conclusion)

If you want to help solve the sorts of problems you are describing, you need to allow the sanctions process to work. That means you can not disrupt it with frivolous requests such as this one. I assure you - it was disruptive, and if you do not see at as such I'd suggest avoiding making enforcement requests altogether. This mess will be cleaned up, make sure you are part of the solution, not the problem. Prodego 07:45, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

By "mess" do you mean the discussions between User:Lar and User:ChrisO about how to "ban" me if none of the complaints they've been filing against me (all of which have, to date, been dismissed) without notifying me don't hold up? No one likes being the subject of "backdoor" discussions by two disaffected admins who took an action that ended up being unpopular and are now striking out and flailing around, punching everyone who has had the audacity to protest it. Nothughthomas (talk) 07:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

So long as you coolly make your points and do not cause disruption, you are very much welcome to be part of the debate about writing a neutral article. But we are not going to tolerate disruption, that has been a problem for too long in this area. Consider this a new beginning, and you will do well. Hold grudges, complain about other editors, etc, and you will not. It is really up to you. Prodego 07:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

With all due respect, no grudges were being held. In fact, model teamwork, in my opinion, was at play. In the most heated thread, User:GoRight and myself - who have both had run-ins with each other over the climate change issue - were acting so cooperatively that we ended up awarding each other barnstars. I had a complaint with 2 specific mods. I exercised my rights to raise issue with cases of abuse by filing one civil complaint in the appropriate place, notifying each. They responded by filing multiple complaints about me, without notifying me, and then engaging in a discussion with each other about how they could "ban" me if none of those complaints "stuck." I think my reaction is indicative of the reaction any reasonable person would experience under that circumstance. Nothughthomas (talk) 08:00, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

If you could write me a short summary (I am not interested in reading an essay), and email it to me, I promise you I will give it a fair review. But I'd remind you, there isn't going to be tolerance for disruption, and the two requests you filed can't be seen as anything but. Prodego 08:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Once again - and as the logs show - I only filed one complaint in the probation enforcement section. As evidenced by this misperception, I fear the type of misinformation being intentionally spread by an agenda driven individual would make any effort I made to exonerate myself moot. My only option is to apologize to User:Lar for disagreeing with him in public, stop participating in editing wikipedia entries related to climate change and pray he stops going after me. Nothughthomas (talk) 08:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

My apologies, I was referring to your comments in the second section, you are correct, you didn't file it, that was my mistake. However, Lar is correct in that you were disrupting the process, and after your response to him I can understand the block. But again, what I'd suggest you do is to follow the advise I left you above when the block expires. Your input is valuable, but only if it is provided constructively. I'd encourage you not to push this issue, take it as a lesson learned and move on. And most importantly, don't do it again, and nothing like this will happen again. Prodego 08:14, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Do what again? Aside from questioning Lar publicly, no one has been able to point to a single specific example of what I did that I'm not supposed to do. We had a situation where two mods felt backed into a corner and they picked me to cruxify and make an example to the many other people protesting their action to stop crossing them. Until someone can cite a specific example, aside from filing one civil and tempered complaint, of what I did I will remain completely befuddled. I shan't hold my breath anything will be forthcoming. Nothughthomas (talk) 08:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

This. Prodego 08:19, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The edit you cited was made by User:GoRight. Too funny! Thank you for continuing to prove my point that no one can actually cite an example of my so-called "disruptive editing." Nothughthomas (talk) 08:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours

NOTE FOR PERSONAL RECORDS: THE BELOW UNBLOCK REQUEST WAS UPHELD ON THE BASIS OF "DISRUPTIVE EDITING" WITH NO CITATION TO THE "DISRUPTIVE EDITING" IN QUESTION. CURRENTLY I HAVE MADE FIVE REQUESTS TO DIFFERENT ADMINS FOR SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF DISRUPTIVE EDITING AND HAVE YET TO HAVE ONE PRODUCED.

Hi Nothughthomas. After having looked through your recent contributions, it appears that you're precipitating drama and not editing collaboratively. Your edits over the past few days have been nearly exclusively in contentious areas and have been largely unhelpful and borderline (or clearly over the line) disruptive. I've blocked you for 24 hours in the hope that you can take a step back and come back (either in 24 hours or longer) refreshed and ready to edit productively. Your current editing trend simply cannot continue here. Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

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.

... this was a complex issue so really that page needs a complete read for total understanding

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)

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.

Again, a rather senseless comment by someone unable to cite a single example of "disruptive editing." Count this as my sixth request for an example of my disruptive editing that no one has been able to provide. Permanently added to bulk-up the LOL FUNNIES section of my Talk page. Nothughthomas (talk) 11:03, 2 January 2010 (UTC)