Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Fred Bauder (talk | contribs) at 16:56, 23 February 2008 (Unprotected User talk:Tasc0: He may use his user page to confess his sins). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Block discussion

I have removed the protection from this page. Any further inappropriate comments will result in the protection being restored. Obviously, there is no way that you are going to be unblocked now or in the near future. The threat on Ronnotel's family just makes that an untenable situation. As for a potential unblock in the distant (something over a month) future, my suggestion is to completely defer any request or consideration of a request until some time in the future after emotions have had a chance to die down. --B (talk) 02:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding.

Regarding the situation, I honestly don't know what Ronnotel is thinking at the momment, he continues to ignore.

I did not threat his family, I said "I hope...". I'm not justifying it was a correct move. I think every one's temper are cool now. I got trolled by a sock puppet and the blocking admin blocked my account for personal attacks and the user who started this didn't get blocked then. I found that unfair.

I'd like to see what Ronnotel has to say about this whole situation. And about the threats: I live probably at 8000 miles away, how you expect me to do what I said? That message was not made in a serious way. You can ask Ronnotel about my e-mail. Tasc0 02:39, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I think Ronnotel is using the blocking to "punish" my recent behave. That's not what the blocking policy is for: Blocks are used to prevent damage or disruption to Misplaced Pages, not to punish users.

I certainly haven't made any disruptions to any articles on Misplaced Pages. The edit warring block was lifted. I think that an indef block for personal attacks it's not properly done. Maybe one week. I don't have a harassment history here. Tasc0 03:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Another point that Ronnotel ignored: Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators. Administrators should also be aware of potential conflicts of interest involving pages or subject areas with which they are involved. Per Misplaced Pages:Blocking_policy#Disputes.

He just blocked my account, salted my talk page and disabled my e-mail feature. He did not report the situation on the AN/I or somewhere else. He was making sure I don't get any chance to plead the block. He also made a rude statement when he agreed to unblock me for edit warring "You should know better...".

He ignores my apologizes. I think that he being an admin, should at least mind his opinion about the issue. I'd like to ask if Ronnotel really should have sysop rights. Tasc0 03:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, making the claim of wrongdoing on Ronnotel's part is pretty much going to assure that you are never allowed back. This isn't a court where there's a "get off on a technicality" or anything like that. I'm sure everyone involved would accept and stipulate as fact that you weren't seriously intending to follow up on the content of the message. But unfortunately, that isn't everything. You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Imagine if you were in Ronnotel's place and received a message like that pertaining to your family. Sure, on an intellectual level, you know that there's no way that anyone can follow up on it, but it's still not something that's going to facilitate a good working relationship. As for the situation with the other user, I realize it's disconcerting that he wasn't immediately blocked, but remember that admins aren't omniscient or infallible. If an admin had noticed that he had twice been blocked indefinitely for harassment and was continuing to behave in that way, he would have been reblocked immediately. --B (talk) 03:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I understand, but not the part "making the claim of wrongdoing on Ronnotel's part is pretty much going to assure that you are never allowed back". Are you saying that because I question an admin's actions, that assures me to never be unblocked? How civil is that?

I still think Ronnotel is using the block as a punishment, this is extremly clear. There's no need to be smart to see it. An indef block is way over the top for my personal attacks, which I made in ONE single day, not since the day I created this account.

I have to ask: did you ever contact with Ronnotel, at all? He's not acting very properly, childlish I'd have to say. I understand my comments may have been harmful, but he's not 10 years old to act this way. He's supposed to be an admin, for Pete's sake.

I also would like to ask you to review the indef block and discuss with the proper people if it's really necessary. I don't have a harrasment, vandal, troll, history. As far as I'm concerned, indef blocks are to stop continue disruptives edits or users.

There's no need to stop me. Tasc0 04:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

If we are going to avoid the guidelines, then I can claim I was just ignoring all rules and I'm sorry for the disruption. Tasc0 05:04, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No, you're missing the point. There's nothing wrong with questioning an admin's decision - that isn't the issue. The point is that if you make this a question of whether or not you were blocked appropriately, I guarantee you every single admin is going to affirm the block. Regardless of whether you were serious or not, capable of following up on it or not, whatever, a statement like that is going to earn an indefinite block. The first step in apologizing is accepting responsibility. The reason for the indefinite block was your statement - no admin error or excess or any such thing is a mitigating factor. If you want to make this an issue of whether or not the block was appropriate, I'm just telling you what the answer is going to be. If an unblock is ever going to be considered, you need to realize that you alone are responsible for the consequences of your actions and that going after Ronnotel isn't going to convince anyone. You were blocked for the statement you made, not because of anything else. As for your question about whether Ronnotel is aware of this, yes, I emailed him. I'm sure he also has this page on his watchlist, so I'm sure if he wants to reply, he will, but he is obviously under no obligation to. --B (talk) 05:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The first step in apologizing is accepting responsibility. I can't apologize to you when I haven't made any comments to yourself. Tasc0 05:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you know what I mean. I think I've done all I can here. As long as this talk page isn't used for personal attacks or harassment, I'll leave it unlocked. If you would like to appeal to the arbitration committee or ask an impartial administrator to consider a request using the {{unblock}} template, both of those avenues are open to you. My suggestion is that (1) you wait a good amount of time - something over a month and (2) you realize that if you make the issue about Ronnotel, the answer is going to be no. --B (talk) 06:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It seems you didn't get my point. When I said I can't apologize to you (B), it's because I haven't done anything to YOU.

I've tried several times contacting with Ronnotel but he just ignores it, thus I can't apologize. That's what I meant.

I don't see the point of waiting 1 week, 1 mont or 10 years. That doesn't make any difference at all, at least for me.

You said I shouldn't make the issue about Ronnotel, yet he ignores, don't reply... what else? Makes sure I don't have any way to communicate in Misplaced Pages, don't report the situation before blocking. Those are things that admins should not do. And again: I'm not making him responsible for it, I'm just pointing out the way he's acting.

And I still support my idea: he's using it as a punishment. This is extremly obvious. And to be honest, I don't think I'll ever come back to Misplaced Pages again, I won't even create a new account or edit with my IP. This ignoring behaviour that Ronnotel decided to take it's stupid. I offered him my apologize several times and he does not accept them because he knows if he do, I'll get unblocked sooner or later. And that's something he doesn't want, of course.

I appreciate how you addressed the situation, B. I'm going to ask a review on the comittee and that will be my last request. You can unblock the account one month later if you want or what ever, I'm not coming back if at least the indef block is lifted and time-ending (i.e. 1 week) block is added to my account in the next days. Tasc0 06:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

A few comments

Hi Tasc0. You asked what this meant (actually, you linked to a different diff, but I assumed that's the one you wanted). What I meant is that I was sorry for having backed you - overridden another admin's actions, in fact - only to have you pull the garbage that you did. I know you didn't abuse the rollback itself (thanks for that, by the way - I continue to believe you when you say that your initial misuse of the tool was owing to a lack of awareness of its restrictions), but when I, as an admin, overrule another admin's actions on a user's behalf, and then the user engages in behaviour of the sort that you did, it calls into question my judgment as an admin. Because of that, I had to acknowledge fault, which I did.

As for you, I think User:B gets it about right above. You were a good contributor, and I'd hope that we can at some point find a way to get you back on the project. But before that can happen, time has to pass, and you have to realize that your comments:

• weren't just the sort of thing that gets said in the heat of the moment and forgotten right after;
• mattered no matter whether or not you actually intended to follow through on them; and
• were richly deserving of an indefinite block.

If that happens, then hopefully I'll be able to support an unblock in the future. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 17:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I actually meant the diff I posted (). It was a rhetorical question (Ronnotel reverted my edits when they weren't vandalism, he being an admin should not do that).

I appreciate it your concerns, but I'm not going to ask to the comittee to review the block. To be perfectly honest, I no longer care about it. Consider myself not stepping my foot Misplaced Pages again to edit any article, whether with this account, a new one or with my IP address.

If you wish to unblock or request an unblock in the AN/I or somewhere else in the future, you're welcome but I won't come here again.

Ronnotel is doing it as a punishment and too bad for him, because I stopped caring.

I might check my talk page once in a while, but I'm done. Wish you the best to you and B (who both have acted in a civilized way) as for other people, who keep acting childlish, they can do what ever the feel like.

I have a favor to ask you, would you remove my username from User:SuggestBot/Requests?

If you wish to contact with me (which I doubt) you can e-mail me. Thank you. Tasc0 23:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. A final thought on whether this block is punitive or preventative: you engaged in totally unacceptable conduct, and have shown very little understanding as to why that conduct was totally unacceptable. Therefore, the only way to prevent that conduct from repeating itself in the future is a block. In that sense, I believe that it is preventative.

In any event, best of luck in your future non-Misplaced Pages endeavors. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 00:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

It's clear you didn't see how many times I offered my apologize, read the thread above. And this block it's not preventative because the personal attacks I made to Ronnotel were only made in that day. So there's no need to prevent my behaviour, because I am not a troll.

Anyways, like I said, I'll check my user talk page once in a while. I think I have made my point of Ronnotel using the block as a punishment and he ignored several times my apologizes. I said I was sorry for it and I understand the comments may have been harmful, what else do you want? A cookie? Certainly I do not need to be stopped. Tasc0 01:21, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Murda Weapon

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Murda Weapon, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Murda Weapon. Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hittmanic Verses

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Hittmanic Verses, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and Misplaced Pages's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Hittmanic Verses. Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)