User talk:Jetcali

Accusation of sockpuppetry
Please red the link on the box called "Notes for the suspect". You may not remove the tag for ten days. If you do, this will be seen as a negative. Allow the process of this accusation to go forward. If you really aren't the one suspected of sockpuppetry, you have nothing to be concerned about. If you are, nothing you do can stop the process from determining this. In any case, removal of this tag by you or anyone else not authorized to do so before the time limit has expired will simply be reverted; persistent removal of this tag could result in the blocking of your account's editing privileges even from editing your own user page. Thank you for your cooperation while this matter is sorted out. - CobaltBlueTony 17:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The sockpuppetry case against you
Please do not remove yourself from the report. If it is true that you are not a sockpuppet, then you should have no problem defending yourself. Thanks. // I c e d K o l a  17:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Falsely accused
Then i stand corrected. I am absolutely annoyed because user:Oden is a little power driven mad to do whatever it takes to trash this user: YuRiPa in public. Whatever this user has done, Oden is determined to do whatever it takes to accuse anyone who contributes to that article as sockpuppeteers? What kind of logic is that? Yes, i claimed that i am a frequent flyer of SIA, and when i browsed through the Singapore Airlines article, I went to the link of Singapore Girl and I was amazed to find there is an article about that subject. I look through the previous edited pages and i wonder why would anyone delete that segment of Symbol of SIA cos it is after all self explanatory that the Singapore Girl is the symbol of SIA.

When i revert the pages, i discovered only later Oden tagged me as a sockpuppeteer along with other list of names like IanFuller and Shimmer77. I do not know who are these people or whether do they belong to one person, i do not know. But can i firmly say that juz because i am editing an article on the subject i like for the first time and i am accused of sockpuppetry. I do not feel this is reasonable at all! Of course i was pissed when click onto the case whereby Oden made a suspect list and i am one of them.

Once this is settle could you please tell him not to take it easy? Wikipedia is supposed to be a fun editing protocol with most accurate information without having to face disputes like this. Perhaps this carries on, then Wikipedia should seriously consider ffree editing brcause this will only caused more disputes and unfair justice treated towards newcomers. Please advise! Regards, Jetcali 17:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * On the subject of taking it easy, it is also advisable, when confronted with something that upsets you here, NOT to take it personally at all, even if it actually is literally directed at you personally. A wise man once wrote, "An answer, when mild, turns away rage."  If you're consistently civil in the face of events like this, and assume good faith even on the part of accusers, then you take away the vitriol that might fuel false accusers.  And if they persist in their course, with you being all calm and collective, in the end they look the fool.  Happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony 18:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)



has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. CobaltBlueTony 18:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)


 * As nice as I am, I am also prudent enough to wait and see how things play out. The method by which sockpuppeteers are found out is pretty effective and irrefutable, so if you are indeed innocent of the charge against you, there is nothing to be concerned about, and someone somewhere will look into the reasoning for the accusations closer.  In assuming good faith, let me illustrate: say the police are on the lookout for a gang member who is accused of killing someone.  All the witnesses have said is that they wore the gang's colors.  Here you come into a new area, oblivious to the gang activity, wearing coincidentally the gang's colors because they were on sale at the local store.  It may not seem fair from your vantage point that you would be targeted for scrutiny, but if you understand the nature of the the place into which you have just wandered, it is understandable.  Here on Wikipedia, you showed up just after someone else was banned, and immediately participated in a manner identical to the suspected circumventer, and nearly exclusively on that topic.  This is behavior identical (not similar, but identical) to what we call a sockpuppeteer.


 * Unfortunate for you, but sockpuppetry is strongly frowned upon as intellectually dishonest and pollutes the integrity and purity of the facts, which is our guiding principle and ultimate goal. Lots of people come here with agendas (religious, political, ethnic, moral, financial) and do what they think they can get away with.  Others don't like being told what to do (they don't realize Wikipedia is not a free-for-all), and simply try to push their edits for the sake of winning.  Whether these people have any respect for what is being atempted with this site or not, it's simply not theirs to mess around with, and those whose responsibility it is to enforce the rules here will do wo without letup, so that the goal of Wikipedia might be furthered.  It might sound corny, and even trivial in today's climate, but that's just the way it is.  Hang in there, and assuming you pass the test here, you'll hopefully have a somewhat deeper respect for our mission.  Thanks, and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony 18:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Help!
I have been blocked by an administrator who accused me of sockpuppetry cos user:Oden tagged me for that! Please help! Jetcali 10:35, 29 December 2006 (UTC)