TestWiki:Community portal: Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

@@ Line 547: / Line 547: @@
 ::::::: Void did not remove the restrictions. They removed Kiko4564's block and suggested reducing the restrictions. ''You'' are ignoring the fact that you violated your topic ban and also unblocked yourself, which is a much more important problem. In addition, a consul has already participated in this discussion and proposed a solution to the problem of users unblocking themself, despite Kiko4564 pretending it was completely fine for users to do that as long as they themself believe the block was wrong. And even if they were removed, you still violated them prior to that comment. Trying to excuse the fact that you violated the topic ban and also the fact that the edits were disruptive just reinforces why there was a need for a topic ban to have been made in the first place. [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User talk:Naleksuh|talk]]) 16:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 :Per our conversation on [[mh:m:IRC|IRC]], I am posting my rationale for using the <code>unblockself</code> permission. I believe the block was wrongly made and poorly justified. I had received messages of support from other crats in the hours before using the permission, and as such I felt comfortable in using it. If I had been alone in believing the block was wrong, I wouldn't have removed it, and instead elected to wait for another member of the community to remove the block. Void had also removed the hard-line restrictions, and as my edits were non-disruptive, there was no need for a block. [[User:BrandonWM|BrandonWM]] ([[User talk:BrandonWM|talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/BrandonWM|contribs]]) 04:44, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
+::  This is not true at all.
+:: {{tq|I had received messages of support from other crats in the hours before using the permission}} Actually, no, you received [https://test.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:BrandonWM&action=history&offset=20220914235959&limit=3 no such messages] between [[special:diff/25100|being blocked]] and [[special:diff/25104|unblocking yourself]]. There were no messages of support from other crats when you decided on your own it was wrong and removed it. Even after the fact only one person agreed that it was OK for you to unblock yourself (not "other crats" plural) - with four users including a consul agreeing it was not OK.
+:: {{tq|and as such I felt comfortable in using it}} You shouldn't have. It will never be OK for a user to unblock themself, especially as seen in this discussion. If it was really that bad someone else will. There's no need for you to remove it yourself.
+:: {{tq|If I had been alone in believing the block was wrong, I wouldn't have removed it}} You were. And if you weren't, why didn't those people remove it?
+:: {{tq|Void had also removed the hard-line restrictions}} Again, Void did not remove the restrictions. What Void actually said was: {{tq|I <b><i>propose</i></b> the restriction be reduced down to a general recommendation against making any "official" style changes without prior on-wiki approval, and an understanding that less leniency will be given in the event of future disruption. }} - the restrictions were not removed and remain in effect. In addition, I would call this the less leniency in the event of future disruption, as will be seen soon.
+:: {{tq|s my edits were non-disruptive}} Firstly, it doesn't matter whether they were disruptive. You violated your topic ban and that's not okay. Topic bans are enforced by blocking the user if they violate it. If you believed you could have made good edits in those areas, you should have requested removal, not simply violated it. As explained before, {{tq|A ban is not merely a request to avoid editing "unless they behave". The measure of a ban is that even if the editor were to make good edits, permitting them to edit in those areas is perceived to pose enough risk of disruption, issues, or harm, that they may not edit at all, even if the edits seem good.}}. Amen. I don't think I could have said it better myself.
+:: And secondly, they '''were''' disruptive. For example [https://test.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=TestWiki:Request_permissions&diff=prev&oldid=46125 this unnecessary removal], [https://test.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=TestWiki:Request_permissions&diff=44628&oldid=44627 this innapropriate self-handling], and [https://test.miraheze.org/w/index.php?title=TestWiki:Request_permissions&diff=next&oldid=44780 interacting with other users].
+:: Because of this, I do not see any valid justification for your actions. In addition, several users have agreed it is not okay for recipients of non-test blocks to unblock themselves, instead taking any of their concerns to a bureaucrat or consul. In addition, the original block has not been proven to be incorrect, and continues to only show to be more and more justified with the user attempting to justify their topic-ban evasion and justification of self-unblocks, repeating the behavior that led to that in the first place and reminding me of why they were blocked and locked originally in 2020, despite their claims to have changed. Because of this, I propose that the original block is reinstated. Please leave your thoughts and / or concerns below. [[User:Naleksuh|Naleksuh]] ([[User talk:Naleksuh|talk]]) 04:58, 22 September 2022 (UTC)