User talk:Gentleness

Indefinite block
You have been identified by checkuser Dmcdevit as a sockpuppet of. As you are evading the indefblock of that account for abusive sockpuppetry, I have blocked you indefinitely. WjBscribe 20:33, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
 * My abusiveness is yet to have been proven ;) Gentleness  ·  Talk  13:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a bit unfair isn't it? Everyone says that if you get banned and really want to come back you should just get a new account and edit non-disruptively. And I did! And I got banned again anyway? Even though I'm not being disruptive anymore [and my contributions are proof]?
 * Gentleness, sit tight; I'm trying to argue your case with the blocking admin. For what it's worth, I think that you've made some great contributions, and should be unblocked. Don't try to add another unblock request, though, okay? GlassCobra 19:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's not a huge big deal and I'm not going to cry a river if I'm not unblocked, but I do feel it's a little unfair as I've tried to be fairly inconspicuous. I have edited since this account's block under Special:Contributions/81.153.124.23, but if I was truly trying to game the system I'd simply have moved on and made a new account, which I haven't. I'm just asking to be allowed to edit normally without having the ghost of a random checkuser getting me banned again when I'm trying to be constructive. Obviously I can be blocked again straight away if people think I'm playing up. Gentleness  ·  Talk  22:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, (furthermore) the most obvious thing I'm neglecting to do here is apologise for the time I've wasted in previously disrupting Wikipedia. That is honestly not my intention here now, I was just bored and thought I could do a little work cleaning up articles about things that I happen to like. That's all. 86.164.161.214 (talk) 22:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)