User talk:151.48.32.216

If you don't want to be associated with blocked users, again, create an account. 331dot (talk) 11:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I understand. I won't appeal again this block, as I said. Just allow me to explain a pair of things and ask you a few others, 331dot.
 * I don't "need" to edit those specific pages. It indeed would be quite curious if I, a different person, wanted to edit the same pages edited by the vandal, but I don't want to.
 * I just find highly disproportionate a 2 years range block after a single IP vandalism, even if in the past the vandal had already disrupted similar pages, and I find quite disturbing seeing it every time should I watch my contributions for the next 2 years. For no other vandal of the same type, as far as I know, has been taken such a hard measure.
 * A few questions. Let's say that "you", first, had seen IP 151.48.129.110 making those few vandalisms in the page "One More Light": I'd like you ask you if you, after reverting them, would have taken the same measure against him (blocking immediately his full /16 IP range for 1 year, then 2 years, including pages that had never been disrupted from that range) or a more proportionate measure (like they're doing in Italian wiki, for example). May you answer truthfully please?
 * Do you happen to know any similar case in English wiki when a single vandalic IP's full range was blocked for a year or more instead of blocking the single IP for a shorter time? In case you do, could you provide a link please? Should there be any, well, I'm 90% sure that they've been made by the same blocker of this IP range, like it was his...trademark.
 * The question I asked inside my appeal: since this vandal uses his IPs for the sole purpose to damage the encyclopedia, isn't it possible to report him to his provider?
 * To conclude, I repeat that I don't need to edit those pages, but suppose that I created an account as suggested and used it to keep an eye on the disrupted pages and revert the vandal every time he comes back: are you sure that I wouldn't be blocked with the accusation of being the vandal himself? This story is so absurd that I wouldn't be surprised...
 * It would be very kind of you to answer sincerely these questions of mine, I hope that you will. Once again, I'd like to reassure you and anyone who read the previous appeal that I'm not appealing again this block, also because I'd receive the same answer, I'm afraid. All I can do is hope that my provider changes my IP range and that it won't be a sub-range of one of the vandal's ranges again, so I won't be annoyed by the block concerning him. 151.48.33.15 (talk) 22:21, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to second guess the actions of the blocking admin other than to say I highly doubt it is based on one instance of vandalism. Feel free to ask the blocking admin directly about why they did what they did, and if they want to change it. I, as a reviewer here, don't see a need to remove a block that doesn't affect your ability to edit even without an account(especially if, as you say, you have no interest in the articles the block applies to). Vandals can be reported to ISPs, but the extent that stops habitual vandals is limited. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for answering some of my questions, I won't go back on those. I'm just asking you please to answer the remaining:
 * Do you happen to know any similar case in English wiki when a single vandalic IP's full range was blocked for a year or more (by any admin, either you or anyone else) instead of blocking the single IP for a shorter time (at least, to begin with)? In case you do, could you provide a link please?
 * I repeat that I don't need to edit those pages, but suppose that I created an account as suggested and used it to keep an eye on the disrupted pages and revert the vandal every time he comes back: are you sure that I wouldn't be blocked with the accusation of being the vandal himself?
 * You'll be doing me a favour if you answer these last questions of mine, 331dot. 151.48.33.15 (talk) 12:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I do not have knowledge of the entire history of blocks on Wikipedia- but I am not aware of such an instance at least enough to provide you with a link to one. I may very well have seen one and just cannot remember. As I said, if for whatever reason you are very concerned about this block that by your own statements doesn't affect you even without an account, you should first ask the blocking admin about it. If you don't find that satisfactory and really want to pursue it, you could go to WP:AN. Since the partial block doesn't affect you, you don't need to request unblock(that's how I see it anyway).
 * I don't wish to respond to a hypothetical situation that has not presented itself in reality. I will say in general terms that if you want to be a good faith editor and make good faith edits, then do so and they will likely be interpreted as such. 331dot (talk) 13:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * All right, I think you've clarified my doubts, thank you again for answering. Bye! 151.48.33.15 (talk) 15:48, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * This again; see User:Ohnoitsjamie/DredgLTA. Expect more forum shopping (e.g., wikibooks,wikitionary,wikivoyage) with the same tedious arguments. Another range recently had it's duration increased in response to the forum shopping. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * 4 edits at 1 go... He's outdone himself this time.
 * What's sad, in my humble opinion, is that he does know that I'm a different user than the music-vandal. In fact it seems clear to me that his blocks aren't against him but against me, whose only fault was appealing a block which didn't concern me. In fact in response to my arguments for a reduction or the removal of the block his only replies are: "forum shopping", "forum shopping", "forum shopping", and "forum shopping". This reminds me when someone is "liquidated", anything he's saying, with expressions referring to the past century's totalitarian regimes: once he's likened to them, he won't be able to say anything any more. But besides this "forum shopping", expression he uses by the way in a different sense than the one I can read in English wiki, and linking to previous appeals, sometimes even shared by a replying admin... Counterarguments to respond to my arguments? Zero. Arguments to prove that such a kind of block is necessary and it can't be lower than this? Zero. Just "forum shopping" and "Dredg vandal".
 * The best satisfaction I'm having is that I've been continuously proving that I'm not the vandal, that is proving that he's wrong about me. I could have disrupted the pages targeted by the vandal or even other pages if I'd wanted but I didn't. My only edits were constructive. And about this appeal, as I said I won't make any others. Scratch the beginning sentence: the best satisfaction is that I'll prove he's wrong also about this point, since I've declared that I won't make new appeals and I've got every intention to do as I said. One thing is charges, another is evidences, and with my behaviour I'm going to prove my truthfulness, not only about me not being the vandal (already proven, actually), but also about me not being a..."forum shopper", right? I'm inviting any admins who want to keep an eye on me to do that, they'll witness my words.
 * Uh, I've just remembered a dialogue of a recently released game, where a character named "Putra" gives the main character an accurate description of another character named "Gullet"... I wonder why it came to my mind right now :-| 151.48.33.15 (talk) 15:48, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that a partial block that (presumably) has no effect on your editing is such a hardship for you. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It's seeing this kind of wide and long block(s) every time I look at my contributions (as I've been explaining since my very first appeals) "such a hardship for me", as long as being referred to as "Dredg vandal" by the blocking admin every time I try asking other admins for a neutral third-party opinion. No one undergoing this knowing he's unguilty would feel peaceful, I bet. Nothing else to add for me. 151.48.33.15 (talk) 18:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)