User talk:65.31.99.71

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This user is a sock puppet of Hungrygirl.
Please refer to contributions for evidence. See block log and current autoblocks.


Contents

[edit] Blocked

This account has been blocked for one week as it is a sockpuppet of Chadbryant. --Yamla 15:02, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] wtf

why the heck have you blocked me? I am not friggin Chadbryant. This is exactly why I hate wickipedia because of bullcrap like this. Please unblock me before I contact the wickipedia site and they will tell you I am not Chadbryant which will then be a sufficient reason to eliminate you from being an administrator. I don't know what the heck makes you think I am Chadbryant, but you have the rest of today before I write a letter to the site about it and then request that you be taken of your administrative duties as well for it. You have absolutely no right to block me. 65.31.99.71 17:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

If you wish to be unblocked, please use the {{unblock}} template on your talk page. Shadow1 (talk) 17:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, please state which user you are. --Yamla 17:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] unblock

I am twentyboy. And I told Chadbryant to friggin stop picking on people because his behavior is domineering these pages. I work on the King of Queens, a little wrestling and Show related pages. I am going to check his history to see if it's anything like mine. This is outrageous 65.31.99.71 17:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Omg! This is insane. His history is nothing even like mine. I rarely even work on Randy Orton. Personally, I think Chadbryant is a jerk. Please stop accusing me of being him and unblock me. I really deserve a lot of respect for what I did to that King of QUeen's page. 65.31.99.71 17:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, you have been unblocked. I have also unblocked Twentyboy. The confusion came in because you edited Chadbryant's signed comments. Also, you (and the Twentyboy account) started editing immediately after Chadbryant was blocked for continued abusive behaviour. --Yamla 17:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. I shouldn't have reacted like that. I understand you're trying to catch a vandal. I had no right to make those threats. Sockpuppets are hard to find and I have looked at Chadbryant's behavior. but even if I was blocked for not being him, I don't really like my response to you. Sorry :) thank you 65.31.99.71 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

On the assumption that you are unrelated to Chadbryant (and this is an assumption I am making), please also accept my apologies. Chadbryant has been a problem editor here at the Wikipedia. Many of the edits were good but the quantity of abusive edits from that user was high. Your edits were also generally good, but given that you edited Chadbryant's comments and at least some of the same articles, and that you started doing so almost immediately after that user was blocked, meant that we lept to the conclusion that you were one and the same. It was not my intention to harm an innocent third party, so please accept my apologies. --Yamla 18:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


Wait, I did?! where? I edited his comment?! 65.31.99.71 18:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Your very first edit, though it did not change the content. --Yamla 18:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I had made a comment on one page and for some reason wickipedia didn't have the finished result when you push the save button, so I was doing a quick test. It was colon mark! why would Chadbryant or anyone go back and correct a little thing like that. Is that why you accused me of being him. Wow!!! I really do apologize for my rudeness though. :) You're just trying to do the right thing 65.31.99.71 18:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

You said: "Unfortunately? Wow, that is the way for a good administrator to act. Now I see what is going on. I should have looked at this page before I apologized. As for Yandman, you're still causing trouble with me, aren't you? and now you're makign administrators make big mistakes and accusing people of things like this. Leave me alone Yandman before I contact another administrator about you"

You said: "How exactly is having good faith accusing someone in the first place because of some yandman who has personal problem, then when the person you've falsely accused apologizes, you run back to your page and say unfortunately I just unblocked him. This is why I can't be here. I can't take this place. People like yandman has a page full of conflict with people and then people like you Yamla"

You are misinterpreting what I meant, though I can totally understand why this is so. It is unfortunate because you should never have been blocked in the first case, and it is unfortunate because Yandman thanked me after I had already unblocked you. The unblock itself is most certainly not unfortunate, it was the least I could do. I have explained already, I believe, why there were several pieces of evidence that you were Chadbryant; you were not blocked simply on the say-so of one user. However, this appears to have been a mistake. I am certainly monitoring your user account to see if any evidence shows up that you are indeed Chadbryant but I don't expect to find any and this action is simply a standard precaution. However, I am most certainly monitoring Chadbryant for sockpuppets as the user has been caught with several other sockpuppets. I understand that you want to have nothing more to do with me and once again, I apologise for this situation. --Yamla 18:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Your actions and personal attacks were way over the line. You have been blocked. No matter what the provocation, this was over the line. Please refrain from editing until you can act in a civil manner. --Yamla 14:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I would if the environment was fair agree with you. But the environment is very unfair so my actions and behavior were totally necessary. I truly and honestly want those things to happen to you guys because of some of your obnoxious behavior. I'm not going to refrain from editing and I will be back whenever I want to. My suggestion if you want this all to stop is just to apologize to me and stop doing things like the first time we meet each other 'you ban me' and revert all my damned edits that I worked hard on rather than looking through your facts. Because I actually deserved to do some sockpuppetry after the mistake you made with yandman which was totally unnacceptable. I really should inform somewhat of it, so you're lucky I just unplug my modem and come right back here each time you block me me. I got the sockpuppetry idea from you. I looked it up over the internet and learned some tricks to deal with you all around here. So thank yourself for me coming back as more than one person and being able to evade a block 65.31.99.71 18:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

As you are aware, your continued personal attacks and death threats will not be tolerated here. If you are not willing to contribute in a civil manner, you are not permitted to edit the Wikipedia. You have been blocked once again. Please do not come back until you are willing to withdraw your threats and to adhere to Wikipedia policies. You are not welcome here. --Yamla 15:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/5/2E/User_talk%7E65.31.99.71.html"