User talk:BlackWidowMovie0

Best of luck to you

Hope this was a good learning opportunity and you had fun, try to make use of the knowledge you got elsewhere (but be sure to appeal your blocks rather than evading them where needed) and do try to read a little more and get acclimated with the local culture before diving into things in the future, Best Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 19:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fast: I am willing to share why I retired this account, if you can create an IRC and join #testadminwiki, I'd be happy to explain. It's not hard to create an account here, I want to explain. Thanks! BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 20:37, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Why are you not able to post on-wiki? Naleksuh (talk) 20:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh and Fast: There are several reasons. I am also open to explaining it to you, but only on IRC or Discord. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 20:54, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

That's fine you don't owe me an explanation. That said if I remember I'll try to drop by on IRC this weekend when I'm less busy in case you want to get something off your chest, and you can tell me as much or as little as you want. Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fast: There's really no point trying to start over anymore. I was trying for a fresh start on this wiki, as people didn't trust me. A user screwed it, and now I'm sad. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

There's a quote I'd like to share with you

It is said an Eastern monarch once charged his wise men to invent him a sentence, to be ever in view, and which should be true and appropriate in all times and situations. They presented him the words: "And this, too, shall pass away." How much it expresses! How chastening in the hour of pride! How consoling in the depths of affliction!

So however sad you are just remember this too shall pass.

Being excluding from a community you enjoy being a part of sucks. Believe it or not I'm still fairly new to the helping maintain a wiki business, but I've been doing forum moderation for some time and I've seen many people take it hard when they're excluded, or even when they get muted by just a few others. What I can say is that even in these times you can't let the online world become the whole of your life, and you can't let your self-worth be defined by what other random people on the internet think of you, and your certainly can't let it be decided by what flags your accounts have on various websites, its silly, and not worth the stress. So log off relax, go watch a netflix marathon whatever you have to do to decompress and take care of yourself.

I have mixed feelings on the whole clean start thing myself, online communities run to some degree on trust, and clandestine reincarnations can undermine that trust. However, I also feel that forgive and forget is a truly important principle, and sometimes a clean start really is best for everyone all around. And the truth is that in some communities no one cares how many accounts you have, even if there all logged on at once, others don't even have user accounts at all; after all logins are evil, and for yet others while you can create an account if you want to almost no one does (thinking of the various chans here). And for wikis the thing is everyone is ultimately coming together for barn-raising, as a group we can all build something none of us could've built on our own, and what's important is that the barn gets built not who built it.

So I'm starting to ramble, but if the communities you want to be a part of don't allow clean starts then don't. Just go back openly, apologize, explain what you did wrong, and see if you can find a way forward, yes it sucks to have a bunch of people say you're a disruptive user, but ignore them, use your emotions constructively to prove everyone wrong by being the best barn-builder out there; grow and learn from your mistakes.

But some places won't allow you back no matter what, many small-wikis and forums (not to mention some of the large ones) are run by the pettiest tyrants imaginable, others will allow you back only with silly and unreasonable demands, if that's the case fuck'em; just walk-away, your self-worth does not depend on their opinions, and frankly the community probably wasn't worth being part of anyway, so go find somewhere else to hang-out because most likely none of them were your friends in the first place.

Anyway I don't care about what you did in the distant past, I care what you are doing now. Maybe you did vandalize a bunch of pages 'for teh lulz', a while back are you going to do it again? No. Well then who cares?

Anyway, I know your still struggling to learn some things but from your limited time here your overall trajectory is positive, so take some time off, go for run, make it double, decide what you are going to do, and try to keep things in perspective, these are all really just fun online group projects you can't take them too seriously, Best Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 23:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fast: You're gonna hate me for this, but TL;DR. JUST KIDDING! I appreciate that. I've had some similar experiences to that myself, it's actually what brought me to Miraheze. I will take another swing at trying to be good here, and would ask for the admin flag back and a full startover. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 00:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to decline a resysop. You were supposed to be here under a one-strike policy, and you already certainly had more than that. You were close to losing sysop permisssions already before removing them yourself. I'm also not sure what you were "kidding" about but it seems like an attempt to deceive Fast which does not help either Naleksuh (talk) 03:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: I am not trying to deceive Fast, I swear. And with the message Fast posted, I'd like to start here free from rules that no one else has. No One strike, nothing. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 10:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

It's fine, I don't hate you, I don't even really feel any irritation. Granted I'm pretty hard to perturb these days, even outright spammers and trolls don't bother me, their motivations are easily understandable, and dealing with them is straightforward. I have sometimes been a tad irritated when dealing with people who have both big upsides and big downsides, like someone who is a strong subject matter expert and insightful commenter but also an occasional dramamonger and thread derailer. In cases like that maximizing value for everyone involves considerable extra work separating and merging discussions, moving things from public to private etc, but even then at most it'll get a brief sigh out of me.

No I'm mildly puzzled. When I first read your comment about a failed fresh start that got screwed I assumed you were referring to this account as a fresh start away from fandom, miraheze, wikimedia, et al. It didn't even occur to me that you would make a sockpuppet here, because creating another account here doesn't make much sense. This wiki is for testing, so if you're not testing yourself then you are facilitating testing for others so they can learn how to build things, and I'm not really sure how you would be significantly hampered in either by others checking in on your contributions, or by the lack of a crat flag; the number of additional tools isn't that large and the functionality is similar. But I can be dense from time-to-time as evidenced by the foregoing so maybe there's something I'm missing.

Unfortunately, and don't take this the wrong way, I will have to rescind my earlier offer to chat Saturday. Informing people in a private forum that you are going to violate community rules or even hinting at it is incredibly unfair to the people you invited there as it puts them in a bind. There is an implicit understanding when someone comes to you in confidence for privacy, that it should be respected, you don't betray people's trust. However if you are in a position to prevent a violation of the community standards that you are responsible for upholding you have a duty to do so as well, you don't betray the community's trust. The best resolution to that conundrum varies on a case by case bases, sometimes it's really easy, but sometimes it's incredibly complex, and you really should avoid putting people in that situation outside of extraordinary circumstances. In fact as I mentioned earlier conversations about wiki related things should almost always stay on wiki, unless privacy is paramount.

So earlier I said your trajectory looked positive, I'm not so sure of that now. However, you're not blocked, so if you still want to experiment with things you don't need tools for you're good-to-go. As for one-strike, you were given considerably more than one-strike, and again not trying to rub in any salt here, but even if this were the first wiki you'd edited on ever, you would have been in rather hot water. And again I'm just trying to keep it real here.

So I feel like everyone is owed a path forward, however narrow, so my question is this: What do you want to accomplish here? Is it something that requires certain flags on your account? So far all you've said is you don't want any restrictions, but if that really is all you want then you have a zillion independent wikis to choose from, some don't even have accounts, no restrictions for anyone. So again, why here? If you help everyone else understand your desired end state then maybe we can come up with something to get you there. Best, Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 04:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Ease of editing break

@Fast: Technically, it's not a sockpuppet, as I wasn't blocked here. I'd like to be able to get the bureaucrat right, that's what I'm trying to accomplish here. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 16:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

It was not block evasion, but that was sockpuppetry. Given that you were involved in a number of disputes, were denied bureaucrat permissions by several crats here, and were close to losing your sysop permissions, that account was a clear attempt to avoid scruntiny. Naleksuh (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

The purpose of this wiki is for testing. Advanced permissions granted for the purpose of testing said permissions. The purpose of this wiki is not to gain rights or for hat collectors. If your goal here is to become a bureaucrat, you may be best looking somewhere else. Naleksuh (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: My goal is to get the 'crat right so I can test the advanced tools on there that sysop perms cannot. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 19:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. Now let's discuss the obstacles in the path there.

As a quick point, Naleksuh is absolutely right, while not block evasion the new account was indeed a SockPuppet, and your creation of it furthers the notion in others that you lack a solid understanding of community norms and expectations.

Thus far you have demonstrated a desire (and I'm only talking about your history here), to exercise the tools you've been allotted outside of a testing environment, however in so doing you have occasionally employed them in an inappropriate manner thereby unintentionally disrupting the normal workflow of the wiki and creating more work for others. Further you sometimes demonstrate excessive pique even verging on a "my way or the highway" attitude when your fellow community members try to find a way forward to allow you to continue to use the tools while avoiding problems by setting some explicit limits on your activities.

This brings us to why the community is reluctant to grant you the crat flag. It's important to understand that the crat flag doesn't really offer that many additional tools (the complete list is here), and some of the ones it does have similar functionality to the tools already in the sysop kit (e.g. deletelogentry works in essentially the same manner as deleterevision). So there isn't much to be gained by testing them. The ones that are kind of differrent like editinterface and editsitejson, could in the hands of someone who makes well-intentioned but nonetheless erronous use of them cause considerable problems. Since there is neither confidence that you will voluntarily confine your use of these tools to testing, nor that you will be willing to accept limitations on their use, others are uncomfortable giving them to you.

It's important to remember that trust is not static, it can change over time. In addition trust is situational, I may trust a mechanic to operate on my engine, but not my heart. I don't think people are going to be comfortable with you using sensitive tools outside the testing environment anytime soon. But with some clear limitations you may be regranted them for testing in the near future, but only after its evident you won't randomly run off and use them incorrectly. So I hope I've fairly explained the concerns here.

Part of offering fair process is engagement I want to let yet have input here, but my initial suggestion is to just pause for now (what cause have you to hurry?). You can continue to test things here like templates and scripts that don't require any tools; we can discuss the exact timetable, because you should have a clear expectation of when it's OK to ask for more, and if there are no issues we put the sysop flag back on your account with clear limitations on the use of tools, set a another timetable, and if everything looks good go ahead and grant 'crat for a day or so and assuming that goes well, and you still feel the need to test things here on an ongoing basis then we can address giving the flag with no strings attached, I think this is reasonable, but I'm open to further suggestion.

So I understand that conflicts are no fun, but please don't take it personally; everyone wants to help you become a better WikiCitizen, we're just not quite sure how. Best, Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 00:17, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fast: I don't see an issue with that. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 20:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Alright, then as agreed just test things that don't require permissions for now. Also, as a corollary, for the time being please refrain from posting on Test Wiki:Request for permissions without talking things over first.

On that point, I'm going to be around here a bit less these next few days, and then not at all from the 18th for a week or so. But I feel I've given you sufficient advice to work things out if you read it carefully. You can also approach other members of the community either here or on their talk pages if you need help or are unsure about something. Best, Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 23:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Sysop permissions

Per your confirmation with Fast, you have been granted sysop rights strictly for testing use only. Any use of sysop permissions for non-testing purposes will result in its removal per your agreement with Fast.

Be aware that due to your history of disruption on other sites and both disruptive editing and sockpuppetry here, this will likely be a final chance with furthur issues resulting in revokation of groups for longer periods of time. If you have any questions you may post at Community portal or any other platform. Naleksuh (talk) 03:13, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: There is an exception, which would be blocking spammers. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

No, such an exemption was not mentioned at all, either by Fast or at all up until now. You could have simply asked if that was an exemption but instead you decided to state that it was, and block 8 different accounts. As such, I have removed your sysop permissions for a longer period of time as this was intended to be your final chance, which was not taken very well, especially by granting yourself more permission than was agreed on. This is intended to be for a longer term period of time. You may request overturn from the community portal. Naleksuh (talk) 21:58, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: That's well more than enough. I'm blocking him for 24 hours to prevent further disruption. Using rights further than what was agreed upon than bureaucrats is disruptive. Count this as the first enforcement of the one-strike rule. Justarandomamerican (talk) 22:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: You may request an unblock on your talk page if you understand the reason for your block. Justarandomamerican (talk) 22:25, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

@Justarandomamerican and Naleksuh: I'd like to request patroller/autopatrolled, as those rights don't come with many extra things, and it's helpful. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 22:08, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: I'll grant temporary autopatrolled, but with the condition that you are subject to up to a 1 month block for disruptive editing while you have the tools. Justarandomamerican (talk) 22:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

@Justarandomamerican: Not sure I would agree with this, as someone with a history of disruptive editing and needing their actions watched and editing/reverting where necessary, it would not make sense for them to be autopatrolled when patrolling their actions is necessary. Naleksuh (talk) 01:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: I'll reduce the duration by quite a bit. Justarandomamerican (talk) 01:30, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

@Justarandomamerican and Naleksuh: Can I request sysop again? BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: You have had zero testing between when rights were revoked and now. Justarandomamerican (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Your sysop rights were intended to be removed for a long period of time, such as several months, especially when you are still blocked from other test wikis and the like. It has been less than a week since then. Naleksuh (talk) 01:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: just a Little bit of advice I wanted to give to you, a good way to start earning trust is by making constructive edit's and also engaging more within communities I think Perhaps if you Interact more with our community and other communities you can perhaps fit in better, I know you badly want admin but i just wanted you to know that editing is not Mainly about wanting rights, Don't forget Every edit is helping build a strong and Amazing community, we want to also start from easy steps to Help learn along the way and i think perhaps if you Read more from mediawiki website you can perhaps learn more about be able to Lead yourself along the way without having Multiple corrections from Admin/Crate's and Stewards. i did also want to point out that in the future it's perhaps good to ask a admin/or crate before preforming certain actions like deleting/blocking/ or etc. as of course some edit's are not always helpful within the community, i do believe in the future you can be able to lead yourself and be able to do things without being corrected for Things but of course it's ok to make mistakes, it's never too late to change. --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 16:24, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: Please Refrain from Removing/and or Reversing That Edit by Naleksuh, he reverted it because you were Removing Other User's reply also please do not delete other user's comments or edit them without that users permission Cocopuff2018 (talk) 03:26, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: Requesting unblock, as I wasn't aware that was a testing page for Indonesian speaking people, and thought it was taking up space, as myself and @Fast: warned to another user before. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: Unblock declined. You most certainly were aware, the page said it. Also, this does not address the reason for your block nor convince me that your contributions will not be disruptive. Justarandomamerican (talk) 01:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not you were aware, it was still the case and does not change the facts involving disruptive editing. Naleksuh (talk) 04:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@Naleksuh and Justarandomamerican: This is a test wiki, therefore eliminating "disruptive editing", as we're all just testing out stuff. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: it is a test wiki But at the moment we cannot trust you with syosp, I would suggest waiting a few months and making edits in the meantime, also it seems like your hat collecting Due to you not making any edits and instantly waning to request Syosp, Without making edits Cocopuff2018 (talk) 17:49, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

With things such as being told your sysop rights were being removed for a long period of time such as several months, then subsequently requesting sysop permissions less than a week later. You also edited another users comment, then when it was undone proceeded to restore it citing a user who is not registered here, and marking a test page as "spam" for containing non-English text. All of this is editing disruptively. Even while done with good intentions (what separates disruptive editing from vandalism), it is still disruptive editing. You also claim that disruptive editing cannot exist because this is a test wiki, which is both entirely untrue, and in addition these things were not testing. Naleksuh (talk) 20:14, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

↑This

I understand you are generally trying to be helpful. However, as we've discussed previously, because you do not yet possess a solid understanding of the local community expectations and behavioral norms, your actions end up disrupting the normal workflow of the wiki and creating additional work for others.

Be mindful that norms and expectations vary between online communities. Hence the fact that it is acceptable on certain miraheze wikis, not to mention a large number of other places, to casually edit someone else's comment does not make it so here (removal of grossly insulting material or other blockworthy posts is however acceptable). Likewise while on the mediawiki wiki the placement of mw:Template:Delete is an important part of the process required to initiate a community discussion over the appropriateness of a page that is not the case here. Since we lack a formal bureaucracy we would just discuss potentially controversial deletions on the page's talk, or in some cases the community portal.

While we are on that topic, the page was clearly not spam; nor was it inappropriate since this is a multi-lingual wiki. The deleted user subpages that you reference were inappropriate neither for being spam, nor for being in Vietnamese, but rather because the user was WikiSquatting. Further deleted pages take up exactly the same amount of space as live pages (total used memory is actually larger following a deletion due to the addition of the deletion log entry), so the pages were deleted not for taking up space, but rather because WikiSquatting is undesirable for other reasons (which really should be self-evident). Anyway, I strongly encourage you to review WikiSpam since you are going to struggle with being a member of any online community if you are unable to properly identify it (see also WhatIsSpam).

Since I'm dispensing advice, temporary blocks may serve multiple purposes; from your perspective the most salient one is that of a test of sorts. If a blocked user accepts the block with good grace and abides by it, that demonstrates some measure of deference to community expectations which can help to rebuild trust. OTOH if a blocked user responds with personal attacks or evades the block that demonstrates the user is either unable or unwilling to comply with the behavioral expectations of the community and signals to everyone that CommunityExile is the most appropriate way forward.

I think I've said this before more or less but I'll reiterate it. Slow down, read more, act a little less, "Lurk moar" etc. Watch what other community members do and how they act; most online community expectations & norms are unwritten. If you see a pattern you don't understand even after observing for a significant period of time then it's OK to ask to learn more. Indeed, in general when your uncertain it can help to ask before acting (within reason). Do this and in time your error rate will drop.

If you don't like the local norms you can always exercise your RightToLeave, and no one will stop you. Indeed you have set up your own wikis where as founder you will have considerable influence in establishing the community expectations and behavioral norms (but preferably not complete total and final say, see GodKing for the problems with that AntiPattern). Indeed if your preferred community style is that of an image messageboard you can probably make that happen though I'm dubious of how successful a content wiki with such a culture would be.

If you decide to stick around the best way to rebuild trust going forward is to confine your edits solely to testing for a while, and leave maintenance and other internal work to others. If you demonstrate a consistent pattern of testing without any issues then in time the community will regain the confidence needed to trust you with additional tools. You can test miraheze scripts here, you can learn how to build mediawiki templates and modules, you can even experiment with categorization schemes all without any tools, and you will need to learn all those things and more if you are going to manage a wiki running on the mediawiki software.

I know This is long, but I hope I've given you some helpful advice, thanks for reading. Best, Fast - ZoomZoom (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fast and Naleksuh: Fine. My other point is this. When I entered this wiki, Naleksuh immediately imposed a one-strike policy on me, because of disruptive editing outside of this wiki. This is unacceptable. If I do something while here, fine, but if I have made mistakes somewhere completely unrelated to this wiki, then there is no reason why I shouldn't be given the chances that everyone else is. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @Justarandomamerican and Cocopuff2018: as they are relevant here. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 22:23, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @BlackWidowMovie0: there is a reason For your 1 Strike, Due to multiple Disruptive editing and Of Course other blocks Elsewhere, of course we can Enforce a One strike, and i do have to say you do have a history of Disruptive editing, and Blocks, but due to your behavior elsewhere I do believe you came here to basically avoid all the trouble you have cause elsewhere, but you did come here With disruptive editing and Using Sockpuppetry And in that case there is honestly No need to give you Many chances when of course you are going to do the same behavior here, As for the Giving multiple chances thing you have been given multiple warnings and chances we have warned you multiple times about your editing, and Editing other user's messages and that is unacceptable to edit other user's message's and make Disruptive edits, Honestly after your block expires you will be given the opportunity to be apart of the community Again and Make Constructive edits, 2 weeks is not long to wait at all you --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 23:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: Put simply, you were given multiple chances. You certainly had multiple chances to stop editing disruptively and did not take them, exhausting multiple warnings and even reinstating undone disruptive edits. Any new user would have been blocked for that as well. In addition, your sockpuppet accounts such as User_talk:Quarter4VCS also received such warnings even when others were not aware it was you (although it was identified as a sockpuppet of you before enough had been exhausted to warrant a block). You have been given what is frankly far too many chances, and used up all of them. Naleksuh (talk) 23:55, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@Cocopuff2018: I will note that you hadn't entered this wiki when I joined, so I don't see a need for you to comment on anything before the point of time in which you joined this community. You don't know the history, so you cannot contribute constructively to this conversation as of this moment. I am not going to remove your comment, even though I am well within my own rights, per talk page guidelines, as I believe you may be able to comment constructively in the future. For now, though, please refrain from messaging here, as this is outside your area of knowledge. Best, - BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 23:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: I wasn't given multiple chances. Originally, in my RfA, before I had made any edits, you said I should be here under a one-strike policy. That isn't "multiple chances". Maybe in your retelling, you gave me 100 chances, but in real life, you didn't even give me one here before suggesting a one-strike policy. See here for proof. @MacFan4000 and Void: I would request Steward input in this conversation. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 00:02, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: but you were given multiple Chances and have done nothing to improve except Disruptive edit, And we have proof of your long term disruptive edit's also please be aware Removing Comments is unacceptable and this conversation is not debatable as i mentioned above you can edit when your block expires.. Also I am allowed to be in this Conversation As I am an admin --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 00:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

The one-strike policy was Justarandomamerican's idea. While I did agree to it, I did not utilize it and infact you exhausted multiple changes. Your talk page is cluttered with warnings that, had you been subject to a one-strike policy, would not have been placed and would instead have resulted in an immediate block. After ignoring multiple warnings and continuing to edit disruptively you were blocked. Naleksuh (talk) 00:34, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Cocopuff2018 and Naleksuh: Coco, anyone can be an admin, so it really means jack here. And Naleksuh, you seem to be trying to shift the blame here. Also, my point isn't what would've happened if that was enforced, my point is why it was suggested in the first place. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 00:54, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0: Because your being blamed for Stuff you did too You cannot Deny it also no one else here is To blame for your behavior i also know your using a proxy --Cocopuff2018 (talk) 00:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Only Justarandomamerican would know why it was suggested. However since this is not a useful attempt at requesting unblock and you have been making incivil comments here I will also warn you that your talk page access may be removed if this continues. Please only use your talk page for requesting unblock in a standard manner, not by bringing up irrelevant things or incivility (or simply wait until the block expires). Naleksuh (talk) 00:58, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Naleksuh and Cocopuff2018: How would you know I'm using a proxy, Cocopuff? Re to Naleksuh: I'm not being uncivil at all, I'm simply pointing out facts, no matter how harsh they may be. I'm sure Fast and Justarandomamerican would agree. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 01:28, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

So are you admitting to using a proxy, then? Naleksuh (talk) 01:29, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: I'm not seeing a policy that forbids it. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 01:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Cocopuff2018's accusation was of you using a proxy to attempt to bypass your block while blocked. Is this the case? Naleksuh (talk) 01:56, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Naleksuh: I believe @Cocopuff2018:'s accusation was me using a proxy. Yes I use a proxy. If he was asking whether I evaded an active block with a proxy, then no, I did not. I have no reason to, when the block is only two weeks. BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 02:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@BlackWidowMovie0:, since you are blocked on wiki, there is no need for you to be doing anything on phabricator, and thus I’ve disabled your account on phabricator. MacFan4000 ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:11, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@MacFan4000: if you did not see he has 2 new IPs recently used by him via Blocklist and I think Perhaps It's worth Running a checkuser he also Admits to using a VPN here. – Preceding unsigned comment added by Cocopuff2018 (talk • contribs)

Appeal

@Naleksuh:, I have reviewed policies on TestWiki, may I be unblocked? I have only a day remaining on the block, anyway, and I would like to add on to what is being said in the Community portal. - BlackWidowMovie0 (talk) 17:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Simply stating that you "have reviewed policies" is rather unconvincing, ideally you would address the reason for the block and show why the incidents will not occur again. Regardless if there was only a day left, it would have been simpler for you to wait the rest of it out. Naleksuh (talk) 18:05, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Please note that I have decided to extend your block to indefinite as well as revoke talk page access. MacFan4000 ^{(Talk Contribs)} 21:27, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk page access restored

Your access to your talk page has been restored at my discretion due to the very real possibility that you have changed over the past 2 years. Any potential unblock request must include: An explanation of your disruptive editing, and what productive contributions (including tests) you will make in the future, an agreement to an indefinite block being placed by any bureaucrat in the event you resume disruption, and it must be convincing enough that either I or another Steward agree to unblock you. Justarandomamerican (talk) 17:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Unblocked

I have unconditionally unblocked you on the presumption that your behavior has changed. Justarandomamerican (talk) 03:15, 2 August 2024 (UTC)