User talk:RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH

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).

RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Please cite the policy on why I was blocked.

Decline reason:

see

talk • contribs • Bot) 19:55, 1 November 2006 (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.

Betacommand, could you cite which of my edits are considered

Wikipedia:Sock puppetry , multiple accounts are allowed provided that the streams do not cross. I would like to get the opinion of other admins on this and post this on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard to review this unfair block. This indefinate block is clearly unjustified. Please assume good faith and unblock this unjustified block. And if my username was inappropriate, I will request to change it. Thanks. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 05:50, 2 November 2006 (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).

RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

What was the reason for blocking my account?

Decline reason:

See dmcdevit's response below -- Tawker 06:18, 1 November 2006 (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.

Heres what an admin had to say about sockpuppet, "According to the official policy, "sockpuppetry in itself, while discouraged, is permitted provided that the streams don't cross." at this checkuser. I've seen many cases where users had more than one account but they were not blocked, provided the streams don't cross. Please unblock my accounts. Thanks. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 06:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly enough, people who, within one day of editing, engage in stalking and massive edit wars across many pages without productive edits, and are merely reincarnations of earlier problem users, aren't welcome here. Maybe I could have been more accurate in my block log, but I think you are a troll, and I don't use that word lightly.

t 06:11, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm surprised at the amount of bad faith and hypocrisy here. Have you seen any of Certified.Gangsta's edits? He has been mass reverting all of my contributions without any reason and mass POV-pushing in China/Taiwan articles (other users have complained about this).

talk · contribs) who was formerly Bonafide.hustla (talk · contribs) and Freestyle.king (talk · contribs

) before he changed his username twice was blocked many times (see previous block logs), is also engage in stalking and massive edit wars across many pages, yet you did not block him. This seems like an abuse of administrator powers and helping Certified.Gangsta gain leverage in many content disputes. Please cite the official policy on why I was blocked.

Certified.Gangsta's has also continually deleted my comments on other user's talk pages here and here. Other users have also complained about Certified.Gangsta's behavior (see above and see his contributions and talk page history).

The reason I made a new username was because I can't access my RevolverOcelotX account anymore and I don't plan on using that account in the future. I'm also surprised that you said I said that I haven't made productive edits. I was making MANY productive edits before Certified.Gangsta came and mass reverted all of my legitimate edits without giving any reason. This is harassment and stalking from Certified.Gangsta which is due to his personal vendetta. On my old accounts, I was also making MANY productive edits. There is no evidence of policy violation here and this block is definately unjustified. I would like to ask you to get the opinion of other admins and the community and unblock this account. Thanks. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 06:35, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RevolverOcelotX is not banned or blocked. Why don't you stick with your old account?--Jiang 06:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting above: "because I can't access my RevolverOcelotX account anymore" -- enochlau (talk) 06:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I can't access my old account anymore. So I can only edit with this account. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 07:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edit before I begin my 1 week "self-imposed" exile. If this user really lost his p/w then he should've made it clear on his userpage that this is an alternate account of RevolverOcelotX instead of trying to create a new identity.--Certified.Gangsta 07:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the policy requires you to state that. Different accounts is permitted provided that the streams don't cross. --RaGnaRoK SepHír0tH 07:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]