User talk:Brumski/Archive1

I don't get it. What happens now? AntHolnes (talk) 23:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Several of admins have contacted the admin that blocked you seeking additional input. We need to await his response before we can act on this request.  Please be patient.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  00:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Woops, sorry. I meant to delete the "what happens now" bit after I read the "you've been blocked" page and found out what happens next. Ta for the response though AntHolnes (talk) 00:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You're edits show an intimate familiarity with Wikipedia and arcane and esoteric knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Care to explain before I unblock you?  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  00:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ??? I'm familiar with the markup language as I use and support the MediaWiki platform at work (intranet and info collaboration) but I definitely wouldn't say I'm intimately familiar with it and I definitely don't have arcane and esoteric knowledge of your guidelines (although you're right, it would have to be arcane and esoteric as from what I can see they're extremely confusing and seem fairly internally inconsistent - sorry, I'd like to lie to flatter you to get unblocked but I'll just be honest and speak my mind instead). I've been reading Wikipedia a lot for the last few months though and I'm a genius, if that helps explain anything? AntHolnes (talk) 01:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * See, I am unconvinced by that arguement. You cite Wikipedia policies and guidelines in your edits, and such policies have nothing to do with Mediawiki... --Jayron32. talk . contribs  01:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I'm not sure what you want me to do. You asked a question (which to be honest was fairly open and confusing, non specific, hence the question marks in my response) and I answered it. If you could more precisely express exactly what your concern or question is I might be able to answer it more precisely. In any case it would be useful for me to know (a) why I'm not allowed to leave a comment in the Jimbo discussion (did it break a rule? If I did break a rule then what was it and in any case just by simple logic I therefore can't be intimate with arcane and esoteric rules as otherwise I wouldn't have broken the rule, whatever rule it was (did I actually break a rule?)) and (b) why I was banned (again, I can't be that familiar with your rules if I've been banned for breaking them (although I could just be stupid I suppose)). So I guess, in summary I'm asking for clarification on what you're actually asking (and why I was not allowed to leave a comment and was banned). Alternatively, if you don't want to re-ask what you're asking in a more precise way, just let me know what policies and guidelines I've quoted in my comments and I could explain that instead. Thanks AntHolnes (talk) 01:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You jump straight into a discussion of the policy page WP:UNDUE immediately with your first edit. You have obviously edited at Wikipedia before.  All I want is an explanation of who you are.  That is all.  New editors don't jump in and start citing policy pages on random articles.  You have experience specifically in editing Wikipedia, and all I want to know, before I unblock, is what your prior experience is.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  01:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but that's just not true. Either you're misunderstanding something or I'm misunderstanding something. I didn't jump into a discussion at WP:UNDUE. I don't even know what discussion is going on at WP UNDUE. I've not commented on WP UNDUE at all, just read my comments and you can see that. I commented on Jimbo's talk page. The only interaction I've had with WP UNDUE was to read a comment on Jimbo's talk page that said the current news events about Jimbo couldn't be added to his page because of WP UNDUE, I then went and read WP UNDUE and (essentially) commented (on Jimbo's talk page, not on WP UNDUE) that that was rubbish. I think I said "WP UNDUE indeed" or something along those lines, meaning "you're using your policy of WP UNDUE to hide behind, to avoid adding stuff to Jimbo's article" Read my first comment if you don't believe me. You want an explanation of who I am. In what context? What my standing in the world is, what my background is, what my name is. What details do you need, ask and I'll tell as long as I don't compromise my security or safety? New editors don't jump into citing policy rules on random article. It's not a random article, I came to it from a news story on Jimbo. It was linked from the news story. I didn't cite policy pages either. I said the words (I'll go look them up) "WP:UNDUE. Yea right! - who do you think you're kidding". If you're saying that is quoting WP UNDUE policy then that's just wrong. Yes, I quoted the WORDS "WP UNDUE" in a rhetorical question but that sentence doesn't mention anything about the policies of WP UNDUE. If I'd said "WP: UNDUE, Yea right, according to section whatever of paragraph such and such you're wrong because of sub section X then that would be quoting the WP UNDUE policy. All I did was say "WP UNDUE, yea right". Even if I did quote WP UNDUE why do I get banned for that? You're saying I should get banned for reading a policy that someone quoted before expressing my opinion related to what they were saying. That's crazy! Surely your policies can't say that. You say I have experience in editing Wikipedia? I've edited an article on my hometown, years ago (actually probably months ago, not sure without looking it up) and I've played around in the sandbox loads and spent a lot of time reading Wikipedia in the last few months and made a list of articles to create with sources and content. Does that make me a sock puppet? I'm sure you get loads of them but it's possible you're being a bit paranoid if that adds up to being a sock puppet, which I'm assuming is the crime that was used to remove my disagreeing comment on the talk page (I really would still like to know what was wrong with the comment - I've read all the others on the talk page and I still don't see how what I did was wrong) AntHolnes (talk) 02:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, that's not very fair. I've already said that I have edited Wikipedia. Your "descision" or "judgement" is calling me a liar when I'm not. AntHolnes (talk) 07:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello? I'm still blocked. It says "You are unable to edit Wikipedia because someone using the same internet address (an 'IP address') or shared proxy server as you was blocked. Your ability to edit Wikipedia has been automatically suspended as a result.

Note that you have not been blocked from editing directly. The other user was blocked by Doc glasgow for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "AntHolnes". The reason given for AntHolnes's block is: "someone drop a sock?".

This block has been set to expire: 02:56, 5 March 2008.

If you do not understand the reason for this block, you are probably on a shared IP address. " Hello?AntHolnes (talk) 07:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Jeez! You people are very unforgiving to people who don't agree with your opinions AntHolnes (talk) 07:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! This all started because I tried to leave a comment about the discussion they were having on Jimbo's talk page. Am I allowed to leave my comment now? Is there somewhere that I can get it pre-approved? The comment is the first comment I made if you want to check it AntHolnes (talk) 08:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)