User talk:Benjetson
Welcome[edit]
|
Courtesy notice of discretionary sanctions[edit]
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Scientology, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.Grayfell (talk) 21:05, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Understood.Benjetson (talk) 18:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Appealing the block[edit]
Benjetson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I would like to contest and appeal the blocking of the two accounts: daylighthief and benjetson. Yes, I have been using two accounts to edit Wikipedia, but I would like to emphasize that I have been doing this legitimately: I have been using these accounts for security and for privacy. I used benjetson as a secondary account to prevent the hijacking of my main account, Daylighthief. I use two virtual desktops through Microsoft in order to keep my account information secure, and I need windows applications while using a macintosh computer. I have no intention of deception or creating the illusion of consensus. I request that I am reinstated the ability to use one or both accounts/IP addresses. Furthermore, the subjects that I usually edit are controversial subjects, and I would like my accounts to be untraceable to my real identity, so as to avoid encountering real-world consequences to my controversial edits. This is another reason why I legitimately use two accounts, for privacy. When I started using both accounts, I was under the assumption that this was an acceptable practice at Wikipedia based on this: Please see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry#Legitimate_uses Another point, I have not edited disruptively, an accusation that I dispute. I have a lot of significant contributions to the pages I have edited and I have not participated in edit warring and tried to address Grayfell's comments on a few of my edits. I have always sought to contribute edits that promote NPOV and are based on reliable sources. With these defenses I request that the bans be overturned.
Decline reason:
All three accounts were used for the same purpose (putting positive spins on Scientology-related articles). The clearly falls outside of the "legitimate" use of multiple accounts. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:38, 19 January 2016 (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.
Benjetson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
You reference my edits as “putting a positive spin,” however, I have fought to maintain NPOV on pages that have undue weight on certain issues, and have not used any promotional or positive jargon. I have used reliable resources with all of my edits as well. I believe there is a bias against NPOV editing on these pages, and I am trying to uphold it. If the use of my accounts is reinstated, I will uphold NPOV in all pages.
Decline reason:
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.