User talk:65.32.158.193

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

{{unblock|My [[User:Encyclopedist|regular account]] is already blocked. So I see no need for this to be as well.}}

You mean all the numerous attacks on John Reid don't warrant this also being block? The comments you left when requesting to have your user pages deleted were also pretty indicative of someone who doesn't intend to contribute constructively --pgk(talk) 19:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
What I mean as that I could at least fix a few redirects, or atleast construtively edit. I want this matter taken to the WP:ArbCom given that my original block was not considered to be permanent anyway. 65.32.158.193 19:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Well you can try emailing the blocking admin, or the mailing list. --pgk(talk) 19:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
I Can't. Thanks anyway, maybe Wikipedia would be better without me, I am sorry for wasting your time, Pgk. Do I know you from somewhere here before?65.32.158.193 19:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Warning: this talk page is in danger of being protected for abusing the {{unblock}} tag. 21:33, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
On a related note, this block is pointless since I will be moving in two weeks, with an access to virtually hundreds of computers. Remember the CIyde vandal? That was me. I plan to launch a new "Wikipedia is Fascism" attack. Since I wasn't appreciated as a regular contributor, you all will just love me as a vandal.
I have decided to launch an attack against User:John Reid and User:Mackensen as of tomorrow. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.32.158.193 (talk • contribs).
What is all this about? Jkelly 18:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Blanking

Please do not blank page contents> :) Dlohcierekim 19:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

An editor from this IP has claimed to be User:Encyclopedist. I seem to have missed some series of upsetting events for that user, but I would like to invite them to discuss those events with me at User talk:Encyclopedist. There's no way for me to be sure that this IP is actually related to that account, so having any kind of conversation here doesn't make much sense. The blanking, however, may have been an indication that they don't feel like chatting. I'm not sure what to make of all this. Jkelly 20:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
User talk:Encyclopedist is protected. User:Zoe|(talk) 20:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
And, as long as the IP remains blocked, and Encyclopedist does not gain access to large numbers of machines, as he claims in his threats above, he is limited to this page for conversing. - TexasAndroid 20:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
I see. Well, I imagine that they know how to use the email function if they're interested in chatting, in that case. Jkelly 21:18, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Not any more. I've protected this page as well, because of the vandalism threats below. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Listen

More than User:Encyclopedist use this account, please unblock it, we have reprimanded him because he has editted here threatening to vandalize the site before, and I kicked him off the computer about an hour ago. This IP belongs to a daycare library where he picks up his little brother.

Personally I have used this account from time to time, and I mostly don't edit, I just read, but that "User is Blocked" sign is pretty annoying.

If this is truely the case, then I'm sorry. But given his past resorting to underhanded methods (nasty sock-puppetry), given his threats just above to do massive vandalism, and given that there has really been no previous indication that this is some sort of shared IP, I really don't think that we can take the chance. It's just as likely that this is still Encyclopedist, trying to come up with yet another way to get his IP unblocked. There's really no way for us admins to be certain. And it's really not worth the chance to let Encyclopedist create a wave of new sock puppet accounts. So sorry, but no. - TexasAndroid 20:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Should I let him talk to you all, he is outside pacing and smoking a cigarette. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.32.158.193 (talk • contribs).
The key is, at this point, I'm really not sure how you could convince me that there are actually two different people involved. As opposed to just one person pretending to be two people. With typing, both would pretty much appear the same. This page is watched by a number of people, maybe someone else could have an idea how it could be proven. - TexasAndroid 20:30, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Since you don't know, I want you to know that this is Encyclopedist yet again. I saw your note on AN/I. I do regret that this situation is in its present state, but I am sick of assholes who either belittled me or mocked while I was here. I am not trying to destroy the project, I just want to get the word out there: Assholes here must fall.

I guess I can forget the whole attack plan or whatever, maybe I'll just return to contributing responsibly in the near future, I guess get boiled up to easily. And if I do come back as a responsible user, I will edit anonymously, because I will be moving, the IP will be brand new, you won't know that I am editting. You never know, I could just start editting construtively, without being known, to the point I may become an admin. Watch out for constructive editors coming your way in two weeks :-). Or maybe a vandal.65.32.158.193 20:36, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly, I am probably one of the first committed users to turn vandal on the project, watch out, some more will join my ranks.

Oh, and while I am threatening, I might ask well get User:Zoe and, hell, you, Tex. See ya tomorrow. I promise 1 vandalism per page, that's all.

Let me not forget Pgk, FreplySpang and maybe uuuhhh others. You'll find out.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../6/5/2E/User_talk%7E65.32.158.193.html"