From: "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Hardblocking usernames Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 19:49:37 +0100
On 11/08/07, Armed Blowfish diodontida.armata@googlemail.com wrote:
On 11/08/07, Daniel R. Tobias dan@tobias.name wrote:
Perhaps it's even a matter of necessity rather than choice, as when they're severely allergic to peanuts and must avoid any food that even has a chance of having touched something with peanut residue; this may impose severe limits on what they can eat, and where their food may come from, but it still wouldn't make sense for them to claim they were "banned" from places that use peanuts.
I still feel banned.
That's entirely up to you. Your continued use of the term remains inappropriately hyperbolic and fundamentally inaccurate, and you know it.
Does it really matter, though? It could easily be a year before I'm sane again, so I may as well be banned for a year at least.
Wikipedia is not therapy.
- d.
No, it isn't. The discussion as to whether you are banned (or not) has been going on for quite a while, and probably too long. It's getting boring. A community ban is when an admin blocks an account indefinitely and no one is willing to reverse that. Your account is not blocked. What has been blocked is a certain type of IP that we do not permit. Doubtless you have excellent reasons for using TOR, none of which interest me in the slightest. But you are not - quite definitely not - banned.
C More schi
_________________________________________________________________ Got a favourite clothes shop, bar or restaurant? Share your local knowledge http://www.backofmyhand.com