Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Sm565

Indefinitely block
Note that the user has been indefinitely blocked. See. JoshuaZ 18:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * So is this RfC relevant? Or should we continue since they might appeal?   Orange Marlin  Talk• Contributions 19:05, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Continue since they might appeal.  Wikidudeman  (talk) 19:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I recommend that you let this go. A read of his talk page shows that he's burned through an awful lot of good will awfully fast; while there is a small possibility of that he might be unblocked, the chance that any of us might win over $100 million from the Powerball is many times larger. Lastly, at best continuing this will just waste your time; at worst it might just encourage him to return to Wikipedia to stir up trouble. -- llywrch 21:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, in my recent experience, these sorts of editors have been successfully challenging/appealing their blocks, particularly if we do not have the correct paperwork done. So I think this is actually necessary or else he will be back, and out for revenge. We need to make sure we dot our i's and cross our t's or I suspect we will have trouble. I have seen this in 3/3 of the indefs I have seen in the last month (not counting this editor's partner-in-crime who was very recently blocked, and still might appeal himself). --Filll 21:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Considering that he was blocked over seven hours ago, & has yet to request an unblock, I'd say wait another 12-18 hours. If he doesn't request an unblock within 24 hours, he probably won't ever do that -- although he may resort to sockpuppetry. If he starts using sockpuppets, then there is no longer a need for this RfC: he will have proved that he should be banned. -- llywrch 01:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't see this coming He's requesting to be unblocked!  Wikidudeman  (talk) 12:23, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * All the more reason to drop the matter as moot. -- llywrch 20:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)