User talk:2600:100D:BE08:14D6:1826:8B90:8FAB:CE76

Please stop
You're helping the other IP disrupt the Teahouse (unless indeed, the other IP is also used by you). Please stop. The Teahouse is for assisting new users with genuine questions about editing Wikipedia. It's not for expressing your political opinions. Bishonen &#124; tålk 17:01, 28 April 2022 (UTC).


 * Hi, which political opinions do you believe me or the other IP to be expressing? I think the OP asked a legitimate question and I did not perceive any intent to disrupt or push a particular point of view in their question. 2600:100D:BE08:14D6:1826:8B90:8FAB:CE76 (talk) 17:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Owning the libs under cover of "just curious" and "diversity of perspective", IMO. Did you see the note about what the Teahouse is for, at the top of the page? "A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia". My italics. So how could that be "a legitimate question"? Please don't bulk up the newbies' board with political point-scoring. Anybody who is genuinely "just curious how something like this coming up at a request for adminship might play out" can simply watch that request for adminship and, you know, see how it plays out. Take part in it, even. Using your account, preferably. Bishonen &#124; tålk 17:16, 28 April 2022 (UTC).


 * if it matters to you, Trump does disgust me and I was glad to see him out of office. Please don't make assumptions of bad faith. 2600:100D:BE08:14D6:1826:8B90:8FAB:CE76 (talk) 17:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
 Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Wikipedia:Teahouse) for a period of 24 hours because of disruptive editing in that area. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 17:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

I am not contesting the block, although I don't believe it was made in good faith. But I do want to ask you what you perceived to be disruptive about my edits? I understand that edit-warring should be avoided, which is why I committed myself not to revert again before I was blocked; but I believe that someone had a sincere and good faith question for the community and it seemed that they were being shut down and unfairly labeled as disruptive. 2600:100D:BE08:14D6:1826:8B90:8FAB:CE76 (talk) 17:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The disruption was the edit warring, the WP:POINTy comments, and using Teahouse as a forum to air grievances about an RfA under the guise of an "innocent question". Your questions are legitimate, if stated in a POINTy manner. Teahouse is meant for beginners to ask questions about Wikipedia editing. If you are asking in good faith, I'd recommend talking with an experienced admin or two (or even WP:ARBCOM member) about it. There are some venues where concerns like this could be raised, but it would need to be in a more general frame and not solely about a specific RfA. The RfA talk page would work as a venue for the case at hand. More generally, somewhere on WP:VP might work if you can pin down a suggestion for the community to consider (I'd suggest that it be with the help of other editors).
 * FWIW, there's always WP:ADMINACCT if you ever feel that an individual admin has behaved inappropriately. But that would have to be after the RfA is over and only if the admin did something with their tools.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 17:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)