Jump to content

User talk:EmeraldBlue

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Will Beback (talk | contribs) at 05:07, 25 June 2006 (→ArbCom: have you submitted a request?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome EmeraldBlue!

Hello, EmeraldBlue, I'm malo and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date, and use edit summaries whenever you change a page. If you have any questions, need help or assistance, check out Wikipedia:Ask a question or contact me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Enjoy Wikipedia!! 

malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 20:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


ArbCom

The ArbCom has not received your appeal. Until such time as they decide to overturn your block, you may not edit here. Too bad that you're turning out to be such a dishonorable, sneaky individual. I'd have expected more. -Will Beback 05:37, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You didn't respond to my messages. I just don't believe that I should be prohibited from editing when I didn't do anything wrong. With all due respect I believe your own actions were dishonorable and sneaky when you tried to get me banned and you knew that I didn't defend myself to the committee. I will wait until my appeal now but I still think that it was unfair and that I shouldn't be treated like a criminal.

EmeraldBlue 05:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure which messages you mean - I responded to those on your "User:AmericanPatriot29" talk page, all except the last. There's really not much left for us to discuss. As for your "trial", there was nothing sneaky about it. I posted a notice about your problematic edits on one of the busiest pages in Wikipedia, and then I alerted you to it. You made several responses, one of which ran to over 800 words. I don't know what more we could have done. In any case, you're welcome to make whatever allegations of wrongdoing you wish to the ArbCom. Until they take your case you are not welcome to edit here because the judgement of your peers is that you did violate Wikipedia policies repeatedly. -Will Beback 06:21, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I made several responses to you but not to the committee. I was unable to participate in the trail because I was occupied that week. Do you have msn or yahoo messenger? I will not be editing here anymore. I will await my trail however and comply with wikipolicy but I still think that it is unfair and that I have been unfairly judged and blocked.

EmeraldBlue 06:28, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this response [1] you addressed "Everyone". You also promised to leave voluntarily, a promise you've broken a few dozen times. Are you going to keep breaking it, or are you going to become a "man of your word"? Anyway, please do contact the ArbCom members. I've provided you with info on how to do that and advice on how to present a case. there's not much else I can do. -Will Beback 06:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I did address the arb committee once. I came out of hiding and voluntarily came to the arb committee but I was swiftly blocked and confined to my user talk page when I tried to resolve the issues openly. I was unable to answer the committee’s questions and address the specific edits as to why I was banned. It never progressed into a trail. I said several times that I want to address everyone’s questions and not just make an opening statement. I would like to review and defend each edit that the committee brings forth. I believe pgk wrote a response to my first defense post and I was going to answer him but when I was in the process of doing so I was banned again by you. I said I would leave voluntarily if I was able to defend myself fully and privileged with a fair trail but I do not believe that it was ever granted. The line you highlighted was at the end of my first defense and I said "I would like to defend myself" implying that I want to defend myself fully and that my first defense was not my full defense otherwise I would have said thank you make your decision. I will wait for my trail but I still think it is unfair and that I shouldn’t be penalized. Do you have msn or yahoo messenger?

EmeraldBlue 07:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I know this is complicated, Wikipedia is unusual. But no, you haven't addressed the Arbcom - you addressed the Admins' Noticeboard/Incidents. And you posted four times.[2][3][4][5]. The fact that you are blocked certainly hasn't stopped you from editing, so it's no defense to say that you were unable to defend yourself. You've already made one appeal, by posting an "unblock" request, and in response your block was confirmed by an uninvolved admin. It has all been very fair and above-board.
Regarding your appeal, please look over the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration to see how requests are normally composed. I believe that there is a 500-word limit, though I can't find it now. You don't have to make your whole case - this is just a request for them to hear the case. They won't present evidence for you to refute - the matter is already at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive103#Jerry Jones/JJstroker. What you'll need to do is to show that you have a strong case for the community block to be overturned. Using "diffs" as evidence, you should show that material mistakes were made in the original decision. In my opinion, you've never addressed the charges directly. I suggest you to re-read the case more closely before you frame your request to the ArbCom. -Will Beback 11:04, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Response two and three aren't mine. Only response 4-5 are mine and response 4 was to you and not the committee. I only addressed the committee with response 5. We never addressed the edits and the reasons why I was banned. We were started to get there but then after my plea to committee to straighten everything out you blocked me and confined me to my user talk page. I tried to be honest and address the committee upfront and I came out of hiding to do it but then you swiftly blocked me after I did. So it's no wonder that I slither around when nobody listens to me. I think it's unfair for the committee to talk over the case with you privately and not even ask me for my side of the story. Sure I can pick a few selective examples to explain but there are a million different edits that they could look at that make me look very bad and without explaining them it's sure that I will be blocked. They are basing their decision on one sided, out of context, and selective information and it's no wonder that they will reach a certain decision when I cant defend myself. I will answer any questions brought to me. As for the noticeboards incidents, I was banned and unable to participate with the decision made. When I came back to wikipedia I was banned and now I am just waiting for a response from the arb committee to hear my case.

EmeraldBlue 01:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We didn't talk over the case privately, we did so on a public page that you were informed about. As for which questions to answer, I told you above that what you need to answer are the charges in the original case, the ones you now say you never had a chance to reply to. Your request to the ArbCom is another chance. You say you are waiting for a response from the ArbCom - does that mean that you have submitted a request to them? If I ask an arbcom member will they say they've received a request? -Will Beback 05:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EmeraldBlue&oldid=60447159"