User talk:2.138.219.49

Christ, what a fucking joke. I happen to be in Spain, where previously I was in the UK. So how am I supposed to edit from the same IP as normal? Did I edit any other pages except the talk page of that IP? No I didn't. Why block this IP without even thinking to ask a polite question or two? Because you are deeply, deeply prejudiced against anonymous editors, that's why. Seriously, you think I deserved all this shit just for changing "explained" to "said"?

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).

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

Request reason:

No block was evaded. The block applied to this IP was just part of a general pile-on by editors who failed to assume good faith, enthusiastically bit the newbie, and generally did their best to hound out someone who was merely making constructive edits. They did well - I doubt very much whether I'll bother to contribute any more. But I resent this further slap in the face deeply enough that I insist on being unblocked, so that at the very least I can thank on their talk pages those few editors who did not join the herd which attacked me so unnecessarily.

Decline reason:

This IP is blocked or, more specifically, the person behind the IP is blocked. You do not get to switch IPs and make edits as if nothing had happened. I would also suggest reading WP:NOTTHEM. If you're serious about not editing any longer, then I suggest starting now. TNXMan 16:12, 27 July 2011 (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.

That's quite an appallingly rude "review". How dare you "suggest" that I stop editing? How dare you suggest that I switched IPs deliberately? I am away from home - how exactly would I use the IP associated with my home internet connection?

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).

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

Request reason:

No block was evaded

Decline reason:

Come back after a week and thank the editors then. It'll allow you time to cool down your angst too. Wifione _.......^{Leave a message} 17:25, 27 July 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Look, it's not a hard point. This IP was blocked for "block evasion". No block was evaded. Ergo, the block should not have been made.

Decline reason:

Any edits made by a blocked user using another account or IP are evasion, as the policy currently stands. Perhaps the policy should be amended slightly to reflect a situation where an IP user does not have access to the IP, but I don't feel in this case I can enforce policy as it should be. Besides, you could have just waited till your vacation was over ... if I were in Spain for a week, the last thing that would concern me would be getting unblocked from Wikipedia. — Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 27 July 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

At least you've given a polite and considered answer, unlike the other two admins who responded, and I thank you for that. The point, though, is that I can't edit the talk page associated with the other blocked IP. There are discussions there that I would like to continue. I did not evade any block - I would have been able to make the edits I made even if I were still using the other IP, and simply by virtue of changing my geographical location I can't make edits that I should be able to.

Decline reason:

As Daniel and TNXman said, however, the block is against you, not your IP address (whatever it may be at the time). Until the reasons for that block are resolved, the block stands. If it helps at all, the block on this IP address will actually expire before the original block will, so you've actually gotten yourself some time off the block. However, until and unless the reasons for the original block are resolved, I'm afraid I can't lift either. I do accept that this particular "Block Evasion" block is simply an unfortunate circumstance, however. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:47, 27 July 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Once again the situation just becomes Kafka-esque and bizarre. Let me remind you that it all started because I changed the word "explained" to "said" in an article. I've suffered constant attacks and provocation since then, including the comments left by admins above. It wasn't my choice to change IP, and I didn't evade the block. I edited the talk page of the previous IP, which I would have been able to edit anyway. You say "until and unless the reasons for the original block are resolved, I'm afraid I can't lift either". How am I meant to address the previous block when I can't edit the talk page of the IP concerned? Can you see how absurd this situation is? What exactly is the block of this IP supposed to be achieving?

Decline reason:

This shows you one of the many problems you can get into by being anonymous (well, not really anon - we know where you are editing from, more than we do for logged in users!). You are at the mercy of whatever your ISP cares to do with your connection. If you can't edit other talk pages, you may request unblock from ArbCom - but they will take 4 weeks or more. I suggest just wait until this short block expires. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:49, 27 July 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Look, I appreciate all the different people who've taken the time to look at this page, I really do, considering the proportion of IPs that are trolls and vandals. But you're not giving me any reason for maintaining this block. It was applied for "block evasion". No block was evaded. So what's the reason for this block? What is it achieving?

Decline reason:

I'm sorry and I sympathise with the way you must feel now; however, I agree with my fellow admins: technically, if you edit using a different IP or account, you're evading your block and may lead to the imposition of another one, as it did in this instance. Therefore, I cannot lift this block. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 00:19, 28 July 2011 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Look, I'm going to keep on arguing here. This is ridiculous. You could perfectly well lift the block. You can perfectly well see that I did not evade any block. You can perfectly well see that I only edited a page I would have been able to edit anyway. You can perfectly well see that I can't discuss a block wrongly applied to the IP I was using before, because you've blocked this IP. You can perfectly well see all of this but you pretend you can do nothing. Remember, this whole insane situation started because I changed a word in an article to a better word. The onslaught that this unleashed was obscene and you're just continuing the unwarranted and savage attacks on someone who only made constructive edits. Now how about you answer the question that I've asked several times already - what is this block achieving?

Decline reason:

I do fully understand your point about not being able to edit from the original IP address, and I do agree that arguing that you are "technically" evading a block is off the point. However, the fact that this particular IP address was blocked for block evasion is also off the point. The point is that you were blocked for grossly unacceptable editing (including, amongst other things, accusing editors you disagree with of having "gone a bit mental" and being "deliberately stupid", calling them "stupid prick" and "motherfucker", and repeatedly telling people to "fuck off". That is not acceptable behaviour on Wikipedia, no matter how acceptable it may be in some places. Is there any justification for unblocking you after that history? No there isn't. Therefore you are not being unblocked. Which IP address you edit from and whether "block evasion" was a reasonable description are irrelevant: I would be declining your unblock request no matter which IP address it came from. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:34, 28 July 2011 (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.

Note

Hi there. This is a suggestion. It might not be conducive to make more unblock requests. A number of administrators have already looked at your earlier requests and have declined your unblock requests. The administrators who have reviewed your block have given their reasons quite clearly. The block is intended to prevent further damage to Wikipedia. Your responses perchance have not been able to elicit the level of trust that could give assurance of whether you really mean what you write. If they had, at least one or more of the administrators would have been giving supporting viewpoints. Additionally, this is presumably a temporary ip address that you are editing through, anonymously. All reasons combined, I would propose that instead of making more unblock requests, engage with editing articles on Wikipedia once (and if) the block is over. I have nullified your unblock request. Additionally, (and I apologize in advance for how this sounds) I should restrain talk page access on this page in case you continue using the unblock request template continuously from hereon. Thanks. Wifione _.......^{Leave a message} 02:54, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your input. But the reasons left for continuing this block have not been adequate, and no-one has been able to answer the questions I've asked. What is the block supposed to achieve? And how am I supposed to discuss the block applied to a different IP that I once used, now that I can only edit this talk page? The best reason that anyone has come up with is that "technically", any edit I make from a different IP is evading a block, even if I only edited a page that I would have been able to edit anyway. So it's all just "them's the rules, guvnor" and "more than my job's worth to do anything about it". Mindless following of "procedure" without heed to the actual situation is incredibly unhelpful.

It was your choice (as it is for any editor) to edit as an IP. In doing so, you have to accept all the baggage that comes with that decision - the majority of IP addresses are dynamic, and many IP users hop from one address to another every day. This block will end on 2011-08-01T12:22:16Z, at that time you should make a decision whether to continue to edit as an IP, or decide to have a user name. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 21:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.