User talk:Empamazing

Hi Empamazing! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Samwalton9 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:23, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. NeatGrey (talk) 02:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really direct and blunt here because it often lets me state something (or even describe something in detail) in far fewer characters than it would take to be more politic with expressing the same views. I don't ever mean anything personally. I'm aware that my responses sometimes appear angry or dismissive, but I just wanted to assure you that I appreciate the discussion as much as you. I wouldn't engage if I wasn't enjoying it. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. 16:04, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the message! It did come off in that way, but I appreciate that it probably wasn't your intent. See you around. Empamazing (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I don't understand why I was blocked. I am not a sock-puppet. If it's an issue about IP addresses (I think that's it), I can explain that privately. Is there anything I can do to fix this? I can't see exactly what reasoning or evidence I need to provide from the documentation. Also, the other user involved is fine with losing their account if that helps with the process.

Decline reason:

The checkuser results make it pretty obvious that you did indeed engage in sockpuppetry. Plausible deniability is not an effective gambit in the face of strong evidence. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:13, 21 April 2016 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

??? How do I contest this?

Wikipedia:Signs_of_sock_puppetry

says "If a checkuser inquiry or other evidence finds that two accounts are using the same IP address to edit the same articles, this does not necessarily mean the same person is operating both accounts. It is not uncommon for people who live or work together or who otherwise know each other to have common interests, or even to have face-to-face discussions about the same articles. Provided that there is no meatpuppetry or canvassing, and each person is editing in a manner that s/he naturally would independent of the other, this is acceptable." This seems to indicate our behavior was perfectly acceptable.

Decline reason:

The sockpuppetry is quite clear, both technically and behaviorally. Mike V • Talk 21:26, 21 April 2016 (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.

Just to be clear, you may also want to read up on the Meatpuppetry section of

• Thanks for the information. I have read that now. I don't know how I'm supposed to respond to these, but this seems like a misapplication of Wikipedia's policy and I hope you guys revise this policy, or at least change all the language like that above so people know to use different IP addresses to avoid seeming like sock/meatpuppeting. At the very least, add the suggestion to put that template on your user page to the other page so people will notice it. Yes, we have similar views and care about the same issues. Yes, we talked about the articles together and edited with the same IP address while we discussed things, but we would have come to the same views independently and are different individuals and had no way of knowing that this would be an issue. Empamazing (talk) 21:34, 21 April 2016 (UTC)}}[reply]
• "Provided that there is no meatpuppetry or canvassing, and each person is editing in a manner that s/he naturally would independent of the other, this is acceptable." seems like an explicit statement that our behavior was acceptable. Empamazing (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading