User talk:TrustedInstaller: Difference between revisions
→Rights revoked: reply
(→Rights revoked: + concur) |
(→Rights revoked: reply) |
||
Line 18:
:::::::: Alright. Re request in 2 weeks. [[User:TrustedInstaller|TrustedInstaller]] ([[User talk:TrustedInstaller|talk]]) 01:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
::::::::: '''Concur completely.''' [[TestWiki:Bureaucrats|Bureaucrat]] should require a [[TestWiki:Consuls|Consul]] to grant, given the level of trust required for that role. {{ping|TrustedInstaller}}, you can re-apply at [[TestWiki:Request permissions]] for [[TestWiki:Administrators|administrator]] on or after '''20 August 2020'''. [[mh:meta:User:Dmehus|Dmehus]] ([[User talk:Dmehus|talk]]) 01:14, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
:::::::::: I've just seen this and TI is right here. A 6 month block would not have been appropiate had it not been an open proxy. That situation does seem to be resolved bar some blacklists caching it. Revoking sysop rights for unblocking someone when the situation is resolved is not an appropiate reason to revoke. If TrustedInstaller wishes to gain his rights back, I see no reason why not. The only thing I'm wondering is how he knew to go straight for that block to remove. [[User:RhinosF1|RhinosF1]] ([[User talk:RhinosF1|talk]]) 07:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
| |||