ΜΑΧΙΜυΜ ΗΟΤ
ΜΑΧΙΜυΜ ΗΟΤ, you are invited to the Teahouse
edit
|
Hi ΜΑΧΙΜυΜ ΗΟΤ! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
Regarding the allegation that I am a sockpuppet, I wish to make the following statement: Bollocks.
As for User:Solarra, someone needs to stop this animal.
- Recreation of a broken link
- Ungrammatical conduct
- Messed an article by spraying with verbiage
- Re-insertion of non-encyclopedc/discouraged political language
- Insertion of pleonasm and more.
All in the name of "reverting banned user", and if the admins had done their work properly in the first place, and had I been suspected of puppetry, then thorough investigations should have been made and I should have been informed/questioned to which I would have provided responses for every issue.
Your encyclopedia is a joke, your policies are flawed, your evidence in inconclusive. I hope that one day this site crashes and never recovers, you admins are officious raving bureaucrats and cannot poor piss out of a boot if there were instructions on the heel. --ΜΑΧΙΜυΜ ΗΟΤ (talk) 22:06, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
- The block on you is a checkuser block, which means someone with access to checkuser confirmed you are involved in sockpuppetry. Per policy your contributions have been reverted. ♥ Solarra ♥ ♪ 話 ♪ ߷ ♀ 投稿 ♀ 22:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
- Per WHAT am I involved in sockpuppetry??? Are you trying to tell me that my identity is known to your bunch of wallies, who in turn know me to me the alleged master and can confirm that the rest of the accounts on the list were operated by that one individual that I too am supposed to be? Or is somebody somehwere who watches too much television simply speculating? In any case, WP:BAN does not allow you to make reverts when those reverts amount to vandalism or wreck the articles in other respects. Right now you are responsible for the desecrated condition of a number of articles because, sockpuppet or not, no vandalism was saved from my account. Now, are you here to write an enclyclopedia? If so, revert youtrself, otherwise do the honourable thing and admit you are a sadistic trol who is taking advantage of technicalities and a "good reputation" with the "right people" so you can professionally vandalise pages with impunity. --ΜΑΧΙΜυΜ ΗΟΤ (talk) 05:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
- You are welcome to contact that ban appeals committee to voice your concerns/request an unblock. Best, Tiptoety talk 12:26, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
- Per WHAT am I involved in sockpuppetry??? Are you trying to tell me that my identity is known to your bunch of wallies, who in turn know me to me the alleged master and can confirm that the rest of the accounts on the list were operated by that one individual that I too am supposed to be? Or is somebody somehwere who watches too much television simply speculating? In any case, WP:BAN does not allow you to make reverts when those reverts amount to vandalism or wreck the articles in other respects. Right now you are responsible for the desecrated condition of a number of articles because, sockpuppet or not, no vandalism was saved from my account. Now, are you here to write an enclyclopedia? If so, revert youtrself, otherwise do the honourable thing and admit you are a sadistic trol who is taking advantage of technicalities and a "good reputation" with the "right people" so you can professionally vandalise pages with impunity. --ΜΑΧΙΜυΜ ΗΟΤ (talk) 05:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)