User talk:Remember Civility

It is plainly obvious from your editing history that this is not your only account at Wikipedia. If you could put my mind at ease by linking this account to your other accounts, that would help a bunch. What are your other accounts? --Jayron32 03:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response, but you should be aware that, according to Wikipedia policy, Wikipedia:SOCK#Inappropriate_uses_of_alternate_accounts, and especially established ArbCom precedent, Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Privatemusings#Sockpuppetry, "Sockpuppet accounts are not to be used in discussions internal to the project, such as policy debates." You may not use secondary accounts to comment on internal project pages. This account has been used primarily to comment at WP:ANI and other internal project pages, and as such, is being used against policy. You should use only your main account to make comments at ANI and other project pages. If you wish to use this account to do so, you must clearly connect this account to your main account, so others are aware with whom they are discussing internal project matters. If you continue to use this secondary account inappropriately, it may be blocked. --Jayron32 00:15, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The use of alternative accounts to avoid scrutiny is against policy. That is all. --Jayron32 22:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Remember Civility. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Jayron32 03:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

This account is blocked for violating WP:SOCK, using an alternate account to edit project space. Jehochman ^Talk 03:33, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Remember Civility (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

1) Policy is clear about when alt accounts may not be used. Editing ANI is fine unless I'm doing it to avoid scrutiny. I have been careful to avoid any abusive use of any account, but especially this alt account.
2) You've blocked a non abusive account, to prevent, well, what? I urge you to allow this non abusive account to continue editing non-abusively. There are realworld reasons why I do not wish this account to be linked to my other account.
3) The only reason people think this is an alt account is because of edit history. I could be an established IP editor with a recent account.
4) I'm disappointed by the amount of bad faith assumed here. I've been open and honest, I could easily have lied and avoided all this trouble.
5) Policy really is clear, and this account isn't violating policy.

Decline reason:

Policy is as policy does and using a sock to avoid your main account being associated with postings to ANI is not acceptable. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

policy and ani

If possible, please could someone add the following line to ani for me? Ta.
"Where in policy does it say 'all project space'? It does not. There are obvious places where alt accounts must not edits - any votes, any deletion debates, etc. ANI is fine, and indeed it's necessary for some people to use alt acts in *VERY CAREFULLY* at ani. There's obviously bad ways to use alt accts at ani, this alt account hasn't done any of those. Remember Civility (talk) 16:45, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saying you aren't avoiding scrutiny doesn't make it so. Saying it over and over again still doesn't make it so. You have created this account solely to avoid having the edits made by this account be connected to you main account. That is avoiding scrutiny. You were given a week to correct this problem, and never have. --Jayron32 02:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You failed to show any abuse from this account. You failed to show any links to any other accounts. You do not know (apart from my comments) if this is an alt account, or just someone who only makes meta edits. Obviously some scrutiny is avoided by having an alt account - that's an ALLOWED part of policy.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Remember Civility (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please either unblock this non-abusive editor, or protect the page to prevent baiting from admin posting messages to already blocked editor.

Decline reason:

From Wikipedia:Sock puppetry#Avoiding scrutiny, and I quote: Using alternate accounts that are not fully and openly disclosed to split your editing history means that other editors cannot detect patterns in your contributions. [...] [I]t is a violation of this policy to create alternate accounts to confuse or deceive editors who may have a legitimate interest in reviewing your contributions. Declined. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Stop... at a WHAMMY!!)} 00:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.

But, if you're really not going to unblock this alt account please protect this page to prevent admins commenting after the block.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Remember Civility (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

from the very next sentence of the policy quoted above While this is permitted in certain circumstances (see legitimate uses), it is a violation of this policy to create alternate accounts to confuse or deceive editors who may have a legitimate interest in reviewing your contributions. - not one person has said why they think I'm trying to confuse or deceive editors. I've been very clear about when this alt account is and is not used. It's pretty bad assumption of bad faith to block with no evidence of abuse from this account or any other accounts. This alt account is (quoted from policy) permitted in certain circumstances (see legitimate uses).

Decline reason:

I'm not sure how this can be made clearer. You are using this account to avoid scrutiny of your main account. This is not allowed, end of story. TN X Man 20:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.