Jump to content

User talk:No More Mogadishu

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 2014[edit]

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).

No More Mogadishu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi. Please allow me to present my defence as follows. I'd like to ask this administrator, did he/she conduct a Sock Puppet Investigation against myself which would have determined my alleged association with User:Theyuusuf143? I'd like to hereby affirm that I am NOT User:Theyuusuf143. I accept I assisted him in creating his article main page as he is a novice user and I thought i'd help him to better describe himself. I realize that I cannot edit anything else apart from my Usertalk page and also cannot create other accounts. What I therefore, humbly request, is for anyone, to please initiate a Wikipedia:SPI against myself and User:Theyuusuf143. This would then determine my innocence or guiltiness. I challenge anyone to prove that I am indeed User:Theyuusuf143! * I shall be emailing the Arbitration Committee after this post to pray for their injunction. No More Mogadishu (talk) 16:40, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; one open request at a time, please. Kinu t/c 18:08, 4 August 2014 (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.

  • Comment. The block is being reevaluated. For the moment, I ask other administrators to be patient.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I've emailed my complaints to the Arbitration Committee and also initiated an unblock request via the wikimedia website as I couldn't even defend myself properly on my own talk page :( I would, however, request an independent admin to consider my case. I have lost faith in Bbb23 and expect an unequivocal apology from him/her. No More Mogadishu (talk) 17:16, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Although it was a reasonable conclusion, it turns out there is no evidence that NMM is a sock puppet. I have therefore removed the tag from his user page. That said, I am leaving the indefinite block in place for probable meat puppetry and disruption.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Hi. Now that you've exonerated me from being a sock puppet; you now accuse me of being a "probable meat puppet and disruption"? I also hereby affirm that I am NOT a meat puppet [and any other types of puppets, if you can find a label to accuse me with]. How was I being disruptive? By initiating an investigation? Please listen to your moral conscience and allow justice to prevail. No More Mogadishu (talk) 17:42, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This wasn't a reasonable conclusion as you say it. You should've followed the due process and treat all editors: new and experiened ones the same. YOu should not allow the old editors to cloud your judgment. No More Mogadishu (talk) 17:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Meat puppet[edit]

Now I have been accused of being a meat puppet. As per Wikipedia:Meat puppetry; I believe i have done nothing agaisnt it. I hereby request that my account be unblocked. I have been again wrongly accused of being "probable meat puppet" and for causing "disruption". Can anyone please explain to me: does being accused only without evidence result in me getting blocked indef without warning? How was I disruptive? The same admin has now closed my request: SPI request I am in need of moral support. I feel very low of being accused wrongly. No More Mogadishu (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23[edit]

My request to the other administrators: I understand and appreciate all of you doing a wonderful job on a voluntary basis. It's not easy dealing with repeat offenders. But I urge you to please consider each and every case on its own merits. Please dont jump to your own conclusions as done by this admin: Bbb23. First, he accuses me of being a sock puppet. I challenged it above and wrote an email to him. He verified and exonerated me. I fail to understand, if he can check my status whether or not that i am a sock puppet; why cant he do the same for Acidsnow? Why is he being biased? What have i done wrong? i presented my case to the best of my ability. And yet, he doesnt even have the decency to admit that he was wrong in his judgement citing that it was a "reasonable conclusion". If this trend continues, this will result in you guys being seen as being unfriendly to new editors. I once again would like to affirm that I am not a meat puppet of the above user. No More Mogadishu (talk) 18:09, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's very simple really, there was no evidence against me let alone was I doing anything wrong. In fact, they was evenisnce agianst you being a sock of Theyuusuf143 and even more with you being a meat puppet of Reer Woqooyi. AcidSnow (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi AcidSnow, I agree there wasn;t any evidence but i had my suspicion. Where is the evidence? I was exonerated. if bbb23 can perform an SPI against me after I challenged anyone; he rushes to do it but yet declines my request to do against you three. Where is the justice? I was right to have my doubt. No SPI was done against you three; therefore i cannot take your word for it that there wasnt any evidence against you until an spi is done. No More Mogadishu (talk) 18:40, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You can't just go around making wild accusations against other users. Below you refer to myself and AcidSnow as "old editors", so clearly you were already on some level aware going in that it was frivolous. The fact that that post was your account's first Wikipedia edit also doesn't inspire confidence. Truly new users simply do not behave this way. They have no idea who is a new or old editor, nor do they particularly care. They're often also only able to make basic edits since they haven't fully got the hang of the wiki coding systm yet. Middayexpress (talk) 18:55, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You admit right here that your not new to Wikipedia and that you have plenty of experence: "I assisted him in creating his article main page as he is a novice user...". AcidSnow (talk) 19:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank AcidSnow and Middayexpress for your comments. I'd like to state when I talked about new users; i was not only referring to myself but also others generally. When you say new users dont behave this way? What are you insinuating? Havent you heard of some people who can copy from other users and are fast learners... You yourself initiated an SPI a few days back... I confess i am a good follower of instructions. You do not know my bacground; therefroe generalising and accusing me of being of anthing is not morally correct. Besides, i could be having a background in the computing industry such as writing codes, or otherwise. therefore you cant conclude that all new users cant behave like this. Besides, i see this as a diversion tactic. However, i'd like to reiterate that I am not a sock/meat puppet.
[I dont know if this matters to you guys and therefore you may consider it as trivial.. but i'd like to state it in order to make my conscience clear... I am a Muslim and therefore for all that's worth, I hereby swear in the name of my one true God that I am not affiliated with the other users.] I urge you to respect the neutrality of this enyclopedia. and if possible, be welcoming to other users and teach them [specifically related to Somaliland] as we know ; therea rent many of us here. No More Mogadishu (talk) 19:41, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kinu[edit]

User:Kinu, when i first requested an unblock, i couldnt even manage to write in full. My edit wasnt accepted. I later on could. Now, you refuse to listen to me citing procedure? Thanks guys! 18:13, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, because having one open unblock request at a time is enough. --Kinu t/c 18:22, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll edit and update the above one. THank you for your valuable time. No More Mogadishu (talk) 18:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. You are welcome to edit the request as you find necessary until it is either accepted or declined. (I am not familiar with this case so I am recusing myself in that regard.) --Kinu t/c 18:31, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User_talk:Kinu, I respect your decision. I would however, welcome, a third party administrator who wasn't involved in this case. Can I therefore solicit your assistance and at least please hear my case? In brief: i was accused of being a Sock puppet. I was exonerated. Now I am accused of being a meat puppet. Please consider my request. I am new to Wikipedia. i value and appreciate your prompt responses. No More Mogadishu (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request[edit]

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).

No More Mogadishu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hi. Please allow me to present my defence as follows. I have been wrongly accused of Wikipedia:Sock puppetry and thereby being blocked indefintiely by User:Bbb23. * User:Bbb23 didn't allow me to defend myself. * Most importantly, I'd like to ask this administrator, did he/she conduct a Sock Puppet Investigation against myself which would have determined my alleged association with User:Theyuusuf143? * I'd like to hereby affirm that I am NOT User:Theyuusuf143. I accept I assisted him in creating his article main page as he is a novice user and I thought i'd help him to better describe himself. * I realize that I cannot edit anything else apart from my Usertalk page and also cannot create other accounts. What I therefore, humbly request, is for anyone, to please initiate a Wikipedia:SPI against myself and User:Theyuusuf143. This would then determine my innocence or guiltiness. I challenge anyone to prove that I am indeed User:Theyuusuf143! * I shall be emailing the Arbitration Committee after this post to pray for their injunction. * Please allow me to state that I have done nothing wrong apart from initiating this SP investigation. I believe in a neutral and unbiased Wikipedia. User:Bbb23's action has saddened me. I believe this is not the way admins ought to behave. They, apart from us editors, should exercise neutrality as per Wikipedia:Administrators#Expectations_of_adminship. He/She should have investigated and proved beyond any reasonable doubt that I am indeed guilty of Sock Puppetry. Not just rush to mere allegations by the very users that i suspect of being sockpuppets. * My final request: Please ensure this investigation is completed and not dismissed. * I am still hopeful that i can find justice. I believe in Wikipedia. I am a frequent user and almost use it as my primary reference point. I wont allow the action of this one Admin to negate all the other good things about this project. But I'd like you to be welcoming other new users such as myself. And, Admins should follow the required due process and not follow their own whims by following their own gut feelings which affect innocent editors; and not most importantly, not to allow the comments from old and expert editors like User:AcidSnow and User:Middayexpress to cloud their judgement. *After i challenged anyone to prove that i am indeed a sock puppet; User bbb23 conducted an spi agaisnt myself and it was proved beyonf any reasonable doubt that i was innocent. Yet, when i requested an SPI against the other users, he declined my humble request. Now he accuses me of being a meat puppet and hasnt undone my block. I request for justice. No More Mogadishu (talk) 18:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you're not a sockpuppet, you are quite likely a WP:MEATPUPPET with a single purpose agenda who is not here to build an encyclopedia. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:52, 4 August 2014 (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.

Comment. Whilst you may accuse me of being a WP:MEATPUPPET, i'd like to ask: have i broken any rules? All I did was to request in the politest way possible to check on some users whether they are sock puppets or not? You cannot accuse me of Wikipedia:NOTHERE- as i was never given the chance due to my indef block.. Whilst i agree to Wikipedia:SPA, i would've edited subject to time, but it seems my time didn't allow that. I haven't vviolated any rule.. therefore blocking me will be seen as an afront to justice. No More Mogadishu (talk) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A query[edit]

Will you please answer this query. Theyuusuf143 was editing before you. Your first edit was to start an SPI. Your second was to create your user page. Your third was to help Theyuusuf143 with his user page. You call him a novice. Where have you got your expertise from? Have you used another account? Peridon (talk) 19:49, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Peridon, thank you for writing on my page and your query. I hereby confirm:
  1. that Theyuusuf143 was editing before myself.
  2. my first edit was to initiate an SPI.
  3. my second edit was to create my user page.

Whilst i confess that i am not aware of all the guidelines here, i asked someone who is familiar with and this user directed me to this policy:Wikipedia:Multiple accounts. I can confirm that i have never misused this privelege. I havent done anything to warrant me from being blocked indefinitely. I didnt do this to gather support from other users who use sockpuppet accoutns to support their views on articles... i didnt violate the 3 revert edit rule.

The reason being cited is that i am being disruptive. All i asked was for an spi. That biased clerk hesitated to accede to my request but when i challenged that i am not a sockpuppet; he went on to perform that check after my inisistence. This raises some questions on his/her moral authority and personal ethical standards and discipline. I pray for justice. I feel that Somaliland's articles are not written from a neutral view. I'd like to ask: how many times can i reques an unblock request? My first was denied as there were two requests on my page.. my second one [above] was denied too.. please help me..No More Mogadishu (talk) 20:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm interested in is finding out how as a totally new account you managed to set up an SPI, and considered yourself experienced enough to help a 'novice' (who had already been editing for a while) to set up his userpage - without asking him if he wanted it done so far as I can see. There could, of course, have been communication off-wiki - if you know him off-wiki, that is. You haven't talked to each other here. Peridon (talk) 21:15, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you User:Peridon. As i said in my above comment, I am a fast learner.. i can copy and consider myself to be a good follower of instructions generally.. Its true i didnt ask him... but i thought this would help him in expressing himself better.. he confessed that he was from Somaliland and i thought adding the flags would be useful for him... I can confirm that i have never spoken to him yet... ever... even off-wiki... The SPI done on myself by that biased clerk is evident in itself... and i believe i have been exonerated beyond any reasonable doubt of being a sock puppet. No More Mogadishu (talk) 21:49, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just some points of clarification from "that biased clerk". What I was able to determine (and it wasn't in response to your e-mail, btw), was that you were not a sock of Theyuusuf143 and that there was no technical evidence linking you to a different master. That doesn't necessarily mean that you are not a sock of someone who hasn't edited here in a while. But based on these subsequent determinations, you may consider yourself "innocent" of being a sock of Theyuusurf143. Additionally, neither I nor any other administrator has to have "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" to block someone for socking. This is not a court of law, and you have not been convicted of a crime. A block may be based on behavior alone. You may now go back to your repeated complaints.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:33, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:Bbb23. I appreciate you for the clarification that the SPI wasnt in response to my email [and challenge].. this therefore gives rise to the following questions:

  1. why did you block me after accusing me of sockpupetry? and if you had determined then you wouldnt have accused me of sockpupetry but meatpupetry instead.
  2. you confessed on my talkpage after my email and unblock request that this block is being re-evaluated. Why the sudden change of heart? why re-evalute specifically after i challenged you after more than two hours? something doesn't add up!
  3. Thanks for exonerating myself that i am not a sock puppet of theyuusuf.
  4. I agree this is not a court.. but you had the tool that this community has entrusted you with.. if you could perform the SPI agaisnt my inncoent self.. why couldnt you do the same for my SPI request that resulted in me getting blocked? this is not fair... if you decide that my request is not good enough.. why block me? i havent broken any rule.. didnt attempt to garner support... but just requested an investigation..
  5. Thanks for informing me that I "have not been convicted of a crime".. This is very re-assuring indeed! Thank you for insulting my intelligence [whatever little that i have been blessed with]...
  6. Yes, i shall go back to "complaining"... which i term it as fighting for my right and justice.. [this is how an oppressed person behaves]...
  7. Finally, the onus is on you to prove why i was blocked... i reiterate that i havent broken any rule. didnt make a single edit on any article pages... but only related to the project... therefore why block me? you said i am not a sockpuppet... yet you accuse me of disruption.. - which is a request... you could've just declined it... thereofre. i ask you to ask yourself.. put yourself in my shoes... and tell me... if i am wrong?
  8. The Arbitration COmittee is my last hope.. i hope they can help me in getting justice... No More Mogadishu (talk) 23:23, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For someone who says he recognizes that this is not a court of law, the above appears to me to be a cross-examination. Good luck with ArbCom.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
user:bbb23, what do you sugges then that i do? Dont try to dodge the question by stating the obvious facts... i request you to:
  1. Can you please elaborate on my behavioral reason that resulted in me getting blocked? What did i do that was wrong? THis is what is done to innocent people who raise their voice in a non-democratic society.. it is simply shut by people who have the power and have the tools to silence innocent people without listening to them.. and then have the audacity to accuse them of something without proof.. and after determing that they are innocent after all, yet refuse to unblock them... this is not a fair society indeed...
  2. remember with great power [tools] comes great responsibility [not accusing someone falsely].No More Mogadishu (talk) 23:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to read WP:Wikilawyering and WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT, both of which are in play here. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:No_More_Mogadishu&oldid=1139033146"