On 12/12/06, Jim Schuler jim62sch@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/12/06, Parker Peters onmywayoutster@gmail.com wrote:
<snip>
Fair enough. I have no questions on the older blocks. Have been
looking
into things a bit more. Tariqabjotu has been kind enough to link me to
evidence
supporting the allegation of block evasion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/RunedChozo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/70.114.237.14
If we compare the two, they look pretty similar, to me.
They don't to me.
70.114.237.14appears to have been used to evade the block on
RunedChozo, as it references the same dispute, uses some of the same language, and shares the same sorts of behavior. It's also worth noting that the vitriol, attacks, and
insults
coming from 70.114 are far more severe than those from RunedChozo.
Looks
like block evasion and serious attacks, to me?
Highly unlikely.
JoshuaZ expressed some concern that 70.114 might have been another anon user
who caused problems, in the past. Sounded like he was considering a checkuser request to try and sort out for sure whether they're the
same
person, but I shouldn't speak for him in that regard.
That looks like a more reasonable assumption.
Also, just as I finished typing this, Tariqabjotu let me know that he's
submitting a checkuser request.
-Luna
If he's vindicated, someone owes him a serious apology and block shortening.
Parker
And if he's not? To whom does he owe an apology?
If he's not, I'd support a month block.
But the chances of that, at my present estimation, are somewhere on the order of the chances of the sun spontaneously exploding tomorrow.
If THAT happens, I'll owe you 20 bucks, but it won't matter because we'll all be dead.
Parker