User talk:RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I fail to see the reason and policy on which I was indefinately blocked.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I fail to see the reason and policy on which I was indefinately blocked. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I fail to see the reason and policy on which I was indefinately blocked. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I fail to see the reason and policy on which I was indefinately blocked. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

{{unblock reviewed|Please cite the policy on why I was blocked.|decline=[[see WP:VAND and if they had not blocked you I would under WP:USERNAME -- Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 19:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)}[reply]

Betacommand, could you cite which of my edits are considered vandalism? I was blocked indefinately before I was even given a warning. I have been making many productive edits on this account and on my old account which I no longer use because I can no longer access it. User:Dmcdevit unfairly blocked my account and accused me of being a "troll" without any evidence. I would like to get the opinion of other admins on this and post this on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard to review this unfair block. This block is clearly unjustified. Please assume good faith and unblock this unjustified block. And if my username was inappropriate, I will request to change it. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 05:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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).

RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What was the reason for blocking my account?

Decline reason:

See dmcdevit's response below -- Tawker 06:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.

User:Dmcdevit, I would like to know the reason and the policy behind why my account was blocked. I thought users were allowed to make new accounts just as long as they don't violate the official policy with the account? I haven't violated any policy in tandem with this account or together with any other accounts. In fact, I quit using those other accounts all together. This seems like an unfair and unjustified block. Please state your reason and cite the policy for the blocking of my account.

Heres what an admin had to say about sockpuppet, "According to the official policy, "sockpuppetry in itself, while discouraged, is permitted provided that the streams don't cross." at this checkuser. I've seen many cases where users had more than one account but they were not blocked, provided the streams don't cross. Please unblock my accounts. Thanks. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 06:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly enough, people who, within one day of editing, engage in stalking and massive edit wars across many pages without productive edits, and are merely reincarnations of earlier problem users, aren't welcome here. Maybe I could have been more accurate in my block log, but I think you are a troll, and I don't use that word lightly. Dmcdevit·t 06:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised at the amount of bad faith and hypocrisy here. Have you seen any of Certified.Gangsta's edits? He has been mass reverting all of my contributions without any reason and mass POV-pushing in China/Taiwan articles (other users have complained about this). Certified.Gangsta (talk · contribs) who was formerly Bonafide.hustla (talk · contribs) and Freestyle.king (talk · contribs) before he changed his username twice was blocked many times (see previous block logs), is also engage in stalking and massive edit wars across many pages, yet you did not block him. This seems like an abuse of administrator powers and helping Certified.Gangsta gain leverage in many content disputes. Please cite the official policy on why I was blocked.

Certified.Gangsta's has also continually deleted my comments on other user's talk pages here and here. Other users have also complained about Certified.Gangsta's behavior (see above and see his contributions and talk page history).

The reason I made a new username was because I can't access my RevolverOcelotX account anymore and I don't plan on using that account in the future. I'm also surprised that you said I said that I haven't made productive edits. I was making MANY productive edits before Certified.Gangsta came and mass reverted all of my legitimate edits without giving any reason. This is harassment and stalking from Certified.Gangsta which is due to his personal vendetta. On my old accounts, I was also making MANY productive edits. There is no evidence of policy violation here and this block is definately unjustified. I would like to ask you to get the opinion of other admins and the community and unblock this account. Thanks. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 06:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RevolverOcelotX is not banned or blocked. Why don't you stick with your old account?--Jiang 06:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting above: "because I can't access my RevolverOcelotX account anymore" -- enochlau (talk) 06:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I can't access my old account anymore. So I can only edit with this account. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 07:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edit before I begin my 1 week "self-imposed" exile. If this user really lost his p/w then he should've made it clear on his userpage that this is an alternate account of RevolverOcelotX instead of trying to create a new identity.--Certified.Gangsta 07:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the policy requires you to state that. Different accounts is permitted provided that the streams don't cross. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 07:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]