User talk:Mobeus Robotica
Mobeus Robotica (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
If I am to interpret the ridiculously vague block rationale of "troll sock" (not linked to anything, just plain text) as an accusation of abusive sockpuppetry, then I'd like to be unblocked unless or until the blocking admin Future Perfect at Sunrise does me the courtesy of explaining which part of that policy he thinks I've actually violated. I'm not a new user but I'm not evading any block or ban with this account, with which I've made precisely three edits, none to project space, none to any Xfd or any other place where vote-stacking or evasion would be a legitimate concern, and as we all surely know admin or not, being familiar with Wikipedia jargon is not an instantly blockable offence. Mobeus Robotica (talk) 22:05, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This is your first edit, and it is clearly not the edit of a person who is brand new to Wikipedia. Since I don't know what your other account name is, and don't understand which of the legitimate uses for a sock might possibly explain the existence of this account, I have no grounds on which to overturn this block. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:11, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
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.
- (edit conflict)Nice. Way to AGF there. I did not say I was "brand new to Wikipedia" anywhere. You should have at least picked that up in the 6 minutes it took you to review this block. It used to be the case that if you wanted to actually accuse someone of abusive sock-puppetry, you actually had to offer some evidence in that regard, or at least a very compelling and case specific rationale, not just say "troll sock" and then piss off. If the situation has changed, if the standard procedure now is to simply block on sight anyone who seems familiar with Wikipedia, then all I can say is fuck you very much. Looking at WP:SOCK#LEGIT it appears to be predicated on someone wanting to use two accounts in parallel, whereas all I've done is re-registered under a new name having dumped the old account years ago. As for you not knowing my old account name, if that's all you're after then I presumably could give you any any old name - yet it's not clear to me how or why that would suddenly get me unblocked, so I think I smell bullshit there too. Mobeus Robotica (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Since you seem to explicitly say in your edits that you don't have any plans to make the encyclopedia better in any way, Wikipedia does not benefit in any way from providing you with an active account. If you change your mind someday, and decide you do want to work on the project again, please feel free to ask for an unblock at the talk page of your primary account. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- As you can see, I was drafting my first response before you decided to expand with this bit of backsliding. On reading it, instead of re-writing another response, I think I'll just say thanks for confirming to me that your initial review was clearly a load of ABF shit, and that you patently have no clue what an abusive sock even is, instead preferring to come out with this garbage that seeks to cast you and the Wikipedia project as one and the same thing. Ask you for permission if I wanted to work on the project again? I don't fucking think so Queenie. If or when that happens, you'll never know about it that's for sure. Mobeus Robotica (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
- Okay. Feel free to ask for another review by a better administrator than I am. I'd be happy to be wrong about your interest in making the encyclopedia better or working cooperatively with other editors. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:14, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
- As you can see, I was drafting my first response before you decided to expand with this bit of backsliding. On reading it, instead of re-writing another response, I think I'll just say thanks for confirming to me that your initial review was clearly a load of ABF shit, and that you patently have no clue what an abusive sock even is, instead preferring to come out with this garbage that seeks to cast you and the Wikipedia project as one and the same thing. Ask you for permission if I wanted to work on the project again? I don't fucking think so Queenie. If or when that happens, you'll never know about it that's for sure. Mobeus Robotica (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)