Bali88 you have actually been quite patient with me, despite my strong opinions and antics. I think you are a quite a decent fellow. I'm really not sure why my comments have been deleted. Thanks for speaking up about it. This seems pretty overzealous to me. I'm not sure why some users are so keen to silence others? I'm really feeling quite down about Wikipedia and all it claims to stand for.
In any event, I don't understand why I have been called "block evading". What does this mean? I guess I created different accounts on computers I use in different locations, but I think I'm guilty of mischief at best.
And I'm actually not a puppet of Decuw. I think a thorough investigation would make this clear. In any event, I guess I'm done with Wikipedia. My voice is now silenced. RussTBagg (talk) 13:12, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks :-) We can all get a little out of line on a topic that we are passionate about. I think your energy can be a asset on wikipedia. Let me know if you need any help with editing when your block is over :-) Bali88 (talk) 13:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer Bali88. I'm hoping my block might be changed from indefinite to some specified period of time. I don't want to be a pest, so I'll wait awhile and then maybe initiate another request for a review. Thanks again, you are a good egg. RussTBagg (talk) 14:40, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
RussTBagg (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The stated reason for the block is that I'm a suspected sock puppet of Decuw. Is mere suspicion enough for an indeterminate penalty? I think if the admins analyzed the IP addresses of activity this would vindicate me. Decuw is an account operated by a real life, bona fide user who is not me. I have edited some pages using RussTBagg and Ballsdeep Singh because they are setup on different computers I use throughout the day. This is certainly mischievous, but I can assure you Decuw is not an account i have ever used. Please analyze the IP addresses and you will see.
Decline reason:
Behavioural evidence would seem to suggest otherwise, but even if you aren't related to Decuw, you've still been violating the policy on multiple accounts (according to technical evidence as well as your own admission). Yunshui 雲水 14:21, 3 April 2014 (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.
Thank you Yunshui雲 for considering my request. I understand your reasoning. Nevertheless, my understanding of the policy is that a block may be in order for my actions, but a permanent block may not be needed. I will accept a time out, but I do not feel it is just to be indefinitely blocked because I've been erroneously linked to the actions of a different user Decuw. Would you consider a time limited block on the assurance that I will only edit under one username going forward? RussTBagg (talk) 14:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)