[WikiEN-l] Follow-up on my Ban from Wikipedia (part 2)

[Armed Blowfish]

On 06/09/07, Vee <vee.be.me at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/09/07, Flame Viper <flameviper12 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> NOTE: This message is the second part of a 3-part message which is over
>> the size limit. I am sending all 3 parts at the same time.
>>
>> On the Wikipedia IRC channel, I have a confrontation with the user Somitho
>> (his IRC nick is Soms). We later become friends, but at that point we were
>> mortal enemies. He says that he is filing a complaint to my ISP. I blank
>> my
>> own userpage (while logged in) and replace it with the text "I AM BANNED
>> FROM THE INTERNET!!!111", linked to Somitho's userpage. It was more or
>> less
>> a sarcastic joke, because by then it had become obvious that my ISP was
>> not
>> going to shut off my Internet.
>>
>> As a result of this dickery on my part, someone continually reverts my
>> userpage, saying it is a personal attack on Somitho (how that constitutes a
>> personal attack I will never know). Elaragirl somehow becomes involved in
>> this and leaves a comment on my talk page. I don't remember what it was,
>> but
>> it was interesting enough to make me go to her talk page and read the
>> linked
>> page "EL:TEACUP" which was an essay in her userspace that talked about how
>> she was not easily offended and that she didn't mind coarse language. Of
>> course, I had been itching for months to find another editor who had the
>> same "to hell with it" attitude as I, and so I left a message on her talk
>> page. I wanted to make it clear that although we seemed to agree on many
>> things, when two people have the same personality it will occasionally
>> create dislike between the two people, and that I did not want that to
>> happen.
>>
>> After reading my comment on Elaragirl's talk page, Yanksox decided to
>> indefinitely block me without consensus. AFTER THE BLOCK, it was discussed
>> on AN/I. Still no consensus, but I remained blocked. I created another
>> account to bring the case up at the Arbitration Committee, but they didn't
>> give a crap (as usual for bureaucracies) and ignored it completely. An
>> infamous e-mail passed between me and Ryan Postlewait, which was presented
>> at WP:AN/I and so badly misinterpreted that I will not even discuss it
>> here.
>>
>> After the Soms/Elaragirl Saga, I remained blocked for a couple months.
>>
>> I created an account named Two-Sixteen one day and began editing articles.
>> I was courteous to everyone and was never warned for any reason. My
>> intentions (although grand) were to edit excellently, become an
>> administrator eventually, and then reveal myself to be Flameviper.
>> Hopefully, the fact that an indefinitely-banned user could become a sysop
>> would show everyone that I wasn't that bad after all, blah blah blah.
>>
>> Two-Sixteen brings up the issue of Flameviper to CattleGirl, a sysop. I
>> deliver a message to CattleGirl through e-mail.
>>
>> The issue of my unblocking is brought up at WP:AN or some such board by
>> SOMEONE OTHER THAN TWO-SIXTEEN. I CANNOT STRESS THIS ENOUGH.
>>
>> There is actually a discussion held, which results in a consensus to
>> unblock me. Through the entire discussion, the user Metros continually
>> takes
>> every opportunity to attack me ("major stability issues", "is a troll").
>>
>> Flameviper is unblocked.
>>
>> Jpgordon performs a random-ass checkuser and finds that Two-Sixteen and
>> Flameviper are the same person.
>>
>> Both accounts are indef-blocked.
>>
>> And of course, everyone proceeds to take their free pot shot at me.
>
> checkusers are free to check whoever they like (as long as they have good
> reason). rfcu is just a convenience.

Of more concern, any eavesdropper between you
and Wikipaedia (or any other website) can run a
'Checkuser' on you.