User talk:Saxophonemn/Archive 1

This archives the ordeal of my banning to show how the banning and name clearing process is a pain!!!

Blocked by a stranger?

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I am accused of being a sock puppet, the accusation is baseless

Decline reason:

The accusation appears to be confirmed by a checkuser, who performed the block. Additionally, you are accused of being a sockpuppet of User:Einsteindonut, who requested unblocking here using the exact same request as you, word for word. Unfortunately, the case seems fairly clear. UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 17:13, 8 September 2008 (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 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).

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

---

Request reason:

I hope this is the correct process for 2nd appeal: Sorry for not clarifying completely as noted I am not Eisteinsdonut, the only circumstantial evidence is a copied tag, which can easily be copied. If you notice my user page is full of boxes etc. I have user activity starting from May when I registered. Reading the histories of the users should show that I am not Einsteinsdonut. If you notice my contributions you would find that I'm a grad student at University_of_South_Florida and an alumnus of UConn I play the saxophone and I'm Jewish. I'm also from Boston (not on my page) so I hate New York, a Red Sox fan, why would I put a New York skyline on my user page? The only reason why I seem to be implicated is that on the JIDF page I make many posts in agreement with Einsteinsdonut, I wasn't aware that agreeing with someone was tantamount to being their sockpuppet, especially since I have been here longer and know how to code here much better. Additionally google saxophonemn I have a real trail, and google user pages, etc.

Decline reason:

Per deja vu — slakr^\ talk / 22:41, 8 September 2008 (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.

Fayssal said this accont was a sockpuppet "by proxy" of Einsteindonut. I'm asking him to clarify what that means. Mangojuice^talk 20:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, I feel like I'm in the dark, I'm accused with no proof nor crime. I've been on Wikipedia since May and only became active last July. Everyone citing Einsteinsdonut as proof because he copied my tag seems strange. I figured out first how to file an appeal, he just copied my page. --Saxophonemn (talk) 23:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

You edit in the same areas with the same computer profile. Furthermore, you edit via open proxies, which is not allowed in general. The tag is not really relevant, it's your contribution history and technical evidence from the logs that make it clear you and Einsteinsdonut are not acting independently. As for your pleas of innocence, please read User:Mangojuice/A letter to sockpuppets. Mangojuice^talk 03:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I read your nice letter essentially it states that all those charged are guilty. You didn't need more than one line. The facts are quite simple I'm SaxophoneMn a person who really exists I have that as my digg, Yahoo, AIM, and Google for example. If you read those pages you will see pictures of me, the real me! The name origin dates back to AIM when there was a character limit so I couldn't get SaxophoneMan.

- -

The open proxy thing? I have my MacBookPro at two locations, school (USF network) and my condo (Brighthouse), I have a registered name, so it's no big surprise who I am.

My editing history when compared to Einstein's is that there are agreements in the JIDF, as noted by both logs that is the only area of confluence. The grand scheme of my edits barely touch upon the JIDF. Why can't anyone see this for what it is. It seems like there is no good faith here, which I thought Wikipedia is suppose to have. --Saxophonemn (talk) 11:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

My Google page

-	

My Yahoo page

I was the most popular google hit at one time for my guitar model. How can one be a sock puppet if they're a real person????? --Saxophonemn (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I see what happened because both of us use macs we have the same type of profiles. I've been using macs since 1985, most mac users can easily keep up to date, using circumstantial evidence as such to prove a point is weak.--Saxophonemn (talk) 16:45, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Help Me - J'accuse

I need help to get out of this ban, I profess my innocence and request help in clearing my username! --Saxophonemn (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

S-man, I believe your professions here are not reaching those who have the power to act. I would suggest going up the hierarchy, or to whatever functions as an appeals board — if you can find out who or where that is. I do not see a record of any warnings having been given, or any unmistakable evidence presented. A serious, capable editor deserves better treatment. Hertz1888 (talk) 18:39, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks like WP:ARB might be the place. Hertz1888 (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I also saw the IP they attributed to my account, says I'm in the SouthEast like I claim. Everyone is making a field day over my undeserved ban. I'm posting to show evidence to admins who look at my page.--Saxophonemn (talk) 01:10, 10 September 2008 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

As this unraveled I pieced together what happened: I voted right after Einsteinsdonut on a picture, someone figured since I agreed and also an up to date Mac user with the same internet profile that I must be Einstein. A simple IP check would show how as a USF grad student living off campus that I am getting an IP out of the SE USA. Further my profile is older than Einsteins, so he couldn't have created me. As noted I have SaxophoneMn in use for handles in google, yahoo, and AIM. Every appeal fails because of Einsteins copying my appeal tag is the "smoking bullet" to some. Anyone seeing my edit history and subjects wouldn't connect us at all. Is it a crime to agree with someone? I wish someone would actually take the time to see comparisons of edit histories etc. The evidence against me is speculative with bad faith.

Decline reason:

First, this is a checkuser-based block and only the admins with checkuser access can evaluate that evidence. But even so ... your defenses both here and above consist mainly of saying "If I'm a sock puppet of his, why would I do this?" Well, wouldn't you agree that it's perfectly reasonable to answer "So you could point to it and say 'this shows I'm not a sockpuppet'"? I don't find it at all conceptually incompatible for a Red Sox fan to have a New York skyline on their userpage ... is there some passage in the General Statutes of Massachusetts that requires all Sox fans to hate everything about New York City? I mean, I'm a Yankees fan, but I still think "Sweet Caroline" is a great song. By your logic I should hate it. So your account is older than is? Maybe Einstein's the sock and you're the puppetteer. That has happened. In short, your counterevidence consists of flawed logic at best and duplicity at worst. So I'm declining. — Daniel Case (talk) 02:47, 10 September 2008 (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.

Amazing this process is like a Kangaroo court, the admins thus far don't have access to any clearing evidence and make thir decisions on muddled claims. I'm not a puppet simply observe the editing habits.--Saxophonemn (talk) 10:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Oye!!!

I noticed that my appeals process was a waste of time since it involves matters which regular admins can't take care of. I wish instead of admins swooping down to make unhelpful comments instead would have told me that it was above their ability. Since I provided enough information to verify who I indeed am, I just have to wait for it all to check out. --Saxophonemn (talk) 19:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Sax I'm so sorry I seem to have gotten you into this "wiki" trouble. It's crazy. I don't even spell "oye" like that. I spell it "oy." The fact that they think we are the same is flattering on the one hand, but very troublesome on the other. They have these rules of AGF and whatnot, but I find that nearly impossible when they continue to not fix this problem despite both our valid claims that they are 100% wrong in this case. After a while, one has to wonder WTF is going on here. I hope you get your account back soon and when you do, please let me know. I keep coming back here hoping to see you reinstated, but not yet! --Einsteindonut (talk) 22:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Computer Profile

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I was blocked because I am a mac user just like einsteinsdonut. This in turn with edits concerning the JIDF made it appear that I was a soclkpuppet. However the actuality of the matter is that Apple computers typically have very similar profiles, the main browsers are all based on Mozilla, most people adopt OS upgrades on a regular basis, and a good chunk of us made the intel transitions. So if anyone else has a checkuser ability I would like them to consider what is going on. I'm holding off on upgrading to OS 10.5.5 to distinguish myself. My IP during the work day is that of the University of South Florida.

Decline reason:

First, the actuality of the matter is that none of us regular admins know what OS and browser you're using. We can only review the same evidence as everyone else. Perhaps Checkuser reveals that; judging by the comments made by admins with access to it I don't think it does. The fact that you bring up yet another similarity between these two user accounts that we wouldn't have otherwise been aware of is not helping you in the slightest.
And, even more damningly, I just reviewed one of the most interesting pieces of evidence ... the contribution histories of both accounts. Why is it that neither you nor Einsteindonut have ever edited at the same time over the last two weeks? Hmm?— Daniel Case (talk) 17:16, 16 September 2008 (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 I was referring to check user which you don't have, and we were both banned.