User talk:Mofgt

User talk:Mofgt

January 2023
I came here from a ping, and the message to me was missing. Just want to let you know that I didn't read it. , was it important for it to be deleted, or just because it was from this user? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It wasn't anything different than you've gotten in the past. But it was a page created by a banned user, and one created to disrupt, so I G5-deleted it via revdel (RD5). --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 00:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, . It's a good question though, Wikilegally speaking, should a user pinged by a sockpuppet be allowed to read what was written? I don't know, which is why I'm not an admin or ever came close, even for a second, of wanting to be. Too many tough calls for a hobby. You admins often have to be the adults in the room. A question. We need this fellow back in the big leagues for the 250th United States birthday events. Say, at least by mid-2024. He'll be a position player. Somewhere along the way he'd have to personally choose and want to go to the minors for the six-month standard offer. Not one sock, not one edit on Wikipedia, keep off the property sir, at least 500 yards back, by choice. But who knows, he may throw away the chance to be a position player and edit the founding pages during their 250th anniversary years, as a free man in full standing (with some logical agreed-upon restrictions of course). So my question: what are the minor leagues? Can a six-monther-standard-offer-seeker edit simple Wikipedia? Can they edit Wikiquotes or other sister projects? As for now, January 2023, he's improving. He needs seasoning in the minors, just to learn to get along with his teammates, which inclues not hustling them. One major reason he was indeffed, literally (why it wasn't a week or two week ban confused me at the time), was for his god awful walls-of-texts. I can vouch that he's overcome that problem. He seems to understand why those walls are counter-productive. Kind of like this one unless...I stop right...now. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Going to try to give my best neutral assessment here, setting aside both my personal desire to see Awolf eventually come in from the cold and the fact that I've blocked him dozens of times. The way I see it there are three things any unblock request would need to address:
 * Awolf was community-banned before the socking began in earnest. (There was some relatively minor, gray-area multiple account use before.) The community ban on its own is one of the easier kinds to come back from. He basically talked his way into it, so if he could show an awareness of his tendency to swamp discussions, and probably agree to some sort of restriction (X words added to discussion per day, something like that), an unban would have been plausible after the traditional 6-month appeal buffer.
 * Awolf has socked. While there's no strict rule on this, the conventional wisdom is that every instance of sockpuppetry resets the appeal timer. In cases of particularly tiresome socking—which, I can assure you as an SPI clerk, this has been—some people like to see longer than 6 months. Furthermore, banned users with histories of socking are expected to give a full accounting of their sock drawer.
 * Awolf has engaged in harassment. This is the crucial part. I respect that you do not personally feel harassed by him; that's your prerogative, and I likewise have had experiences where someone harassed me and I reacted in a way ranging from "meh" to "hey honey get in here, I've gotta read you the death threat I just got, it's hilarious" (nothing to do with Awolf, tangenting) . But some of his other victims have expressed significant discomfort at their treatment, and so any unblock request with any significant chance of success would need to contain a sincere acknowledgment of the hurt caused there, and preferably an apology. One-way IBANs would be likely.
 * So TL;DR: At least six months no socking, full accounting of past sox, understanding of the original reason for the ban, making amends for past harassment... All that and I'd say an unban is possible ; it would really depend on how he conducted himself in the unban discussion.Oh and Awolf, if you're reading this and do have an interest in pursuing that unban, let's skip the reply-by-sock merry-go-round; I'm reachable at wikimedian@tamz.in.Postscript: Oh, and Awolf's only globally locked accounts are "only" username impersonations, so yes he is allowed to edit other wikis if he complies with their rules. But be advised that many have policies, written or unwritten, along the lines of simple:WP:1X. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she&#124;they&#124;xe) 06:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
 * A good analysis, and thanks for explaining that minor league play is allowed. Six to eight months in the minors seems about right in order to learn some of the things he's weak on. Knowing what and what's not due weight is important, the habit of "my way or the highway" involving page-name changes and other things he tends to fight fellow Wikipedians on rather than take advice and cordially withdraw when getting too involved in a minor point (a trip to the showers because of a Snickers bar), realizing that fellow Wikipedians are teammates and not opponents to feel superior to and trick (save that for the old-timers over at Britannica), editing a draft page and not adding 100 quick edits to tire out fellow page-editors who just delete the bunch because they are volunteers and did not sign up to check every one of a hundred daily edits, and other major or minor corrections in his fielding and ball control. He is, like almost all of us, a Wikipedia addict, so it seems it would be hard to pack it up for six or eight months and move to the minors. But doable at some point. Key is learning how not to get indef banned while there. At his present acceptance level of Wikipedianship and a less-than-Wikipedian ability to restrain himself from having to take control, demand his way, and allow others to collab-despite-intelligence, he'll probably agitate editors enough for bans, but hopefully one or two week bans without losing future editing rights and being sent down to Double-A. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)