Hi,
Please see [[User talk:Viking/ban]]
User:Viking has been nominated for a ban by Mbecker, seconded by Wapcaplet, thirded by me, fourthed by Dante, fifthed by CGS. No opposition at the time of writing (except from Viking).
Actions include censorship of sex-related pages; totally false claims that he was a sysop, to intimidate users and make them stop criticising him; suggesting that the reason someone wanted to know the identity of his sysop account was so that they could hurt his children, and so on. General unpleasantness.
So I suppose we now need a ruling from on high. :-)
Thanks,
I sixth the ban. He has only made destructive contrabutions.
a.crossman@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:Hi,
Please see [[User talk:Viking/ban]]
User:Viking has been nominated for a ban by Mbecker, seconded by Wapcaplet, thirded by me, fourthed by Dante, fifthed by CGS. No opposition at the time of writing (except from Viking).
Actions include censorship of sex-related pages; totally false claims that he was a sysop, to intimidate users and make them stop criticising him; suggesting that the reason someone wanted to know the identity of his sysop account was so that they could hurt his children, and so on. General unpleasantness.
So I suppose we now need a ruling from on high. :-)
Thanks,
On Fri, 30 May 2003 a.crossman@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Please see [[User talk:Viking/ban]]
This page has just been deleted by [[User:Kils]], who is a sysop. He also deleted [[User:Viking]] shortly afterwards. His explanations in the comment box for both deletions were: "project of my children - deleted after threats".
User:Viking has been nominated for a ban by Mbecker, seconded by Wapcaplet, thirded by me, fourthed by Dante, fifthed by CGS. No opposition at the time of writing (except from Viking).
Actions include censorship of sex-related pages; totally false claims that he was a sysop, to intimidate users and make them stop criticising him; suggesting that the reason someone wanted to know the identity of his sysop account was so that they could hurt his children, and so on. General unpleasantness.
What evidence can you present that Viking's claims of sysop status were false?
Oliver
+-------------------------------------------+ | Oliver Pereira | | Dept. of Electronics and Computer Science | | University of Southampton | | omp199@ecs.soton.ac.uk | +-------------------------------------------+
he didn't present any evidence that he was a sysop. I know what you're going to say:"innocent until proven guilty". If I said I was the president of the US, would you assume that I was until proven otherwise? It's really the same thing. --LittleDan
Oliver Pereira omp199@ecs.soton.ac.uk wrote: On Fri, 30 May 2003 a.crossman@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Please see [[User talk:Viking/ban]]
This page has just been deleted by [[User:Kils]], who is a sysop. He also deleted [[User:Viking]] shortly afterwards. His explanations in the comment box for both deletions were: "project of my children - deleted after threats".
User:Viking has been nominated for a ban by Mbecker, seconded by Wapcaplet, thirded by me, fourthed by Dante, fifthed by CGS. No opposition at the time of writing (except from Viking).
Actions include censorship of sex-related pages; totally false claims that he was a sysop, to intimidate users and make them stop criticising him; suggesting that the reason someone wanted to know the identity of his sysop account was so that they could hurt his children, and so on. General unpleasantness.
What evidence can you present that Viking's claims of sysop status were false?
Oliver
+-------------------------------------------+ | Oliver Pereira | | Dept. of Electronics and Computer Science | | University of Southampton | | omp199@ecs.soton.ac.uk | +-------------------------------------------+
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).