User talk:The owner of all/Archives/2022/March

+
I can't speak for the blocking admin, previous reviewing admins, or indeed any other admin besides myself, but this may be useful info, just in case I'm typical. I do sympathize with this slightly Kafkaesque situation where you request an unblock that addresses the block rationale, it is ignored, and eventually procedurally closed.

Your block notice says the block was for personal attacks (the linked ANI thread explains these were the attacks on your user page that you refused to remove). I don't think you're going to repost the junk on your user page again. I doubt anyone thinks that. But I am personally hesitant to ever unblock you myself, because of your history of disruption, feuding, and unpleasantness that preceded that. It's not just the fact that you posted that snark, but that it was such a wormy thing to do, and then you lied about it for quite a long time before coming clean. And this was not out of character.

So my suggestion is to re-write this unblock request as if you were appealing a block for "personal attacks after a history of long term disruption and unpleasantness", not just addressing the personal attacks that were kind of the straw that broke the camel's back. If you'd like some examples of what I'm talking about, you should go thru the history of this user talk page, and look at the many complaints and warnings that you dismissed. Consider the possibility that many of them (most? all?) were valid.

I'd be willing to unblock based on a self-aware unblock request that says (convincingly) "I'll stop being a jerk". I'm not willing to unblock based on "I won't repost the slimey things I said, which weren't really a big deal anyway." Feel free to accept of reject this advice; I'm not going to get into a whole discussion about it, it's just free advice. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)


 * When a user is blocked for a specified reason A, I do not believe it is reasonable to expect that user to formulate an unblock request that addresses an unspecified "reason B" that is different from what they were blocked for. I also disagree that I have a history of "disruption" or any of those other things.
 * Is it wrong to bring issues to AN/I? I don't think so. Do editors who create content have priority over editors who don't create content for WP but make other valid edits that help WP? I would say no.
 * I am having a hard time finding the discussion, but I remember a Wikipedian making a point about "disruption", why is it that when someone makes an edit that is compliant with policy, they get accused of "disruption", rather than the involved editors having the necessary discussion to determine what is compliant with policy and what is not. There's a reason why I oppose sanctions that are based on essays and/or one or a few users' opinion. On Wikipedia, policies are what we have agreed on while essays are what one or some users believe but does not have widespread agreement.
 * Thus, I cannot formulate an unblock request for "personal attacks after a history of long term disruption and unpleasantness" / "I'll stop being a jerk" or whatever. One, it's not the stated block reason, two, it's only the opinion of some and I don't believe I should have to placate such in order to be allowed to edit Wikipedia.
 * TOA The owner of all ☑️ 03:35, 11 March 2022 (UTC)