| Revision as of 19:03, 26 August 2008 editPietru (talk | contribs)3,694 edits →Because someone has to appreciate all the good work you do, even if certain POV-pushers don't. ;) Good Work!← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:20, 28 August 2008 edit undoMaunus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,261 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| '''Please leave messages below.''' | '''Please leave messages below.''' | ||
| ==Sock-thing== | |||
| Has there been a ploy to frame you? After this sock-circus I don't really know what to believe any more, it is so complex and tedious that I can't even be bothered to think about what the truth behind it may be. But I think the strongest reason that you were implicated was the fact that you had been banned asa result of your editing dispute with yolgnu immediately before the sockpuppets started to show up. This could be bad luck, it could be because the sockpuppeteers wanted to make you look bad or it could be because you are one of them. The doubt about which of these scanarios is true was the main reason you were implied in the checkuser I think, and the checkuser seems to have cleared you of the charges. However, the socks are quite easily recognizable normally since apparently all they do is troll and try to tie up other editors in disputes about seemingly insignificant details in the maltese related articles. I think probably the best way you can exonerate yourself is by maintaining an impeccable conduct - that is showing that you are not a troll by cooperating instead of obstructing colaboration since exactlu obstruction and disruption is the hallmark of this bunch of socks. Note that this is not an accusation of not having been cooperative in the past - but only a piece of advice that you can easily convince everyone that you are not a disruptive sock simply by not beginning to act like one. In fact I don't even care whether you are a sockpuppet or not as long as you don't cause disruption the way they did. Happy editing and don't worry about it.] 14:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:20, 28 August 2008
| This is Pietru's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: 1, 2 |
 |
|---|
| 15 January 2025 |
|
User talk:Kalindoscopy/Archive 1
Please leave messages below.
Sock-thing
Has there been a ploy to frame you? After this sock-circus I don't really know what to believe any more, it is so complex and tedious that I can't even be bothered to think about what the truth behind it may be. But I think the strongest reason that you were implicated was the fact that you had been banned asa result of your editing dispute with yolgnu immediately before the sockpuppets started to show up. This could be bad luck, it could be because the sockpuppeteers wanted to make you look bad or it could be because you are one of them. The doubt about which of these scanarios is true was the main reason you were implied in the checkuser I think, and the checkuser seems to have cleared you of the charges. However, the socks are quite easily recognizable normally since apparently all they do is troll and try to tie up other editors in disputes about seemingly insignificant details in the maltese related articles. I think probably the best way you can exonerate yourself is by maintaining an impeccable conduct - that is showing that you are not a troll by cooperating instead of obstructing colaboration since exactlu obstruction and disruption is the hallmark of this bunch of socks. Note that this is not an accusation of not having been cooperative in the past - but only a piece of advice that you can easily convince everyone that you are not a disruptive sock simply by not beginning to act like one. In fact I don't even care whether you are a sockpuppet or not as long as you don't cause disruption the way they did. Happy editing and don't worry about it.·Maunus·ƛ· 14:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)