User talk:TroyfromAust

Yet another sockcheck... Timeshift (talk) 03:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Knock your socks off, can someone sitting on a computer 20km away edit at will. Eat your heart out TroyfromAust (talk) 03:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abuse of multiple accounts, ha! Who am I supposed to be? TroyfromAust (talk) 04:31, 12 January 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Why have I been suddenly blocked without a Checkuser? Who's accounts am I supposed to be abusing with multiple accounts? Cant someone who has their own IP contribute to discussion on wikipedia

Decline reason:

Behavioral evidence makes it abundantly clear that you are either a sockpuppet of User:Watchover, or you are editing specifically at his behest. It doesn't really matter whether you are him, or if you are a different person pressing the keys while he stands over your shoulder directing you. I see nothing here that indicates that unblocking would be a good idea. Jayron32 17:25, 12 January 2010 (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.

Bias I see[edit]

User:Jayron32 you obviliously came into this on a bias veiw from your comment left on User:Orderinchaos's Talk Page. How can I be someone elso without there being a connection, both physically and technically? Just because I know how the edit in html doesn't mean I am experienced TroyfromAust (talk) 04:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just give it up and realise that your actions mean you won't be editing wikipedia for a long, long time. Timeshift (talk) 05:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I wont retaliate, as this is what your being on wikipedia is all about. You remind me of a 12 year old that has no friends and sits at home in his room editing wikipedia and playing warcraft. Not singling you perosonally out, it is a true story, you just fit the mould very, very well. But I suppose you are noe going to do your level best, consult the gang I have been reading about and twist this into a personal attact (which again is all you seem to do on wikipedia) What have I got to give up? TroyfromAust (talk) 05:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um...[edit]

For someone who claims not to be a sock, and given I forgot to identify the account you are alleged to be a sock of, you seem to know an awful lot about the case and its key protagonists and antagonists and be rather defensive. I'm not going to bother a checkuser every time an obvious sock shows up - that's why we have WP:DUCK. Orderinchaos 06:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]