Confused1984 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am wrongly accused of being a sock puppet for people I have no connection with. On Oct 9 I posted an innocent, polite question on the talk page of the Michael Ignatieff page and it was deleted by Sarah as "edit by banned user removed per WP:BAN>" I sent an email to Sarah Nov 13 and have never received a reply. The email politely makes out the case that I am not who she says and not connected to whom she says. I do not know how I can prove otherwise? How do I prove I am not associated with anyone but me?
Decline reason:
Confused1984 was blocked after only two edits, both of them talk pages. The apparent reason was that one was on Michael Ignatieff's talk page. I find no SSP or RFCU involving Confused1984. Based on what is known, the case for this block was weak. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Text of Nov 13 email to Sarah:
With great respect, Madam, you were wrong to ban me for the reason, as best I can tell, that you have decided I am the same person as Ottawaman or neutraliser or whatever misfit you feel is my alter ego.
There is no point arguing with you, since you have all the power, except I felt I should point out the following:
- I am genuinely new
- I am not these people, or any other Wikipedia user, past or present
- I am a Canadian, but I am not associated with any side of the internal Liberal Party machinations that seem to dominate the Ignatieff page
- that said, I do know about the matters being posted, and I joined in because I was offended that references to real news media reports of real facts were being removed with illogical, terse explanations ... at first I thought it was just the work of Canadian partisans on one side or another of the Ignatieff controversy ... but then it became clear that the changes were being killed by people like you who have no bias one way or the otherr about Ignatieff and are not necessarily Canadian (who don't have a dog in this fight) which left me all the more confused because the changes did seem neutral and properly sourced
- It seems I have stumbled onto something larger, and with much longer history, which leads to conclude that I am one of those other a**holes whom you have banned ...
- only I am not. To the extent I can read their ramblings, we don't seem to be similar at all (for one thing I have been polite and respectful) ... except we're Canadians who follow Canadian politics. With respect, if you think that everyone who follows Canadian politics is a sock puppet for Ottawaman or whichever creep you have banned, then you are being unfair and reflecting an outsider's ignorance of my country.
- It would be akin to me saying this: "You're from Melbourne? Then surely you know Jane in Perth." My mistake would be in overlooking the fact that yours is a big, diverse country, with lots of people. Well, so is mine. Yet I respectfully suggest that this is what you are doing. I'm a Canadian Wikipedia user. I follow Canadian politics. Therefore I must be the same as that other Canadian loser you banned. And what's the logic? Because there is only one person in all of Canada who follows politics and cares about the Wikipedia entry on Michael Ignatieff?
I am not sure why I am even bothering to write this message. I guess I am offended by your autocratic presumption that I am the same as some nutjob with whom you had prior dealings.
Is there a way to prove to your satisfaction that I am not? Do I have to disclose my real identity? I don't think that is fair to ask of me, nor should it be necessary.
Post a discussion on my talk page? Right now I am so frustrated and turned off the entire experience with Wikipedia that I cannot be bothered. Perhaps I may change my mind, but it hardly seems fair. After all, I am the one being wrongly accused.
Help Wikipedia change the world? Not if you're this arbitrary and unfair. No way.