I am a valued and respected contributor at WP, and I am now blocked for 1 week for "trolling an rfc and linking to a questionable site" (here). I am not a troll, and I love WIkipedia, but itts unforgiving, kabbalist administration is not characteristic of a "free encyclopædia", but ratherV.I. Lenin. For telling the truth, I was blocked. That shows that it is the free encyclopædia that only Kabbalists can edit. Jimbo is a troll himself.

here are the blocks

Well, at least this means we've been promoted again. First we were a "hate site," then an "attack site," but now we've been upgraded to "questionable site."

If we keep this up, we'll make "somewhat unpleasant site" by the end of the year!

Oh, and... uh, sorry you were blocked like that. Damn them all, etc.

Remember the Golden Rule of Wikipedia:

"Don't question the authorities within Wikipedia - just keep adding to the sum of human knowledge like you're supposed to"

That way, you might not get blocked.

The Rfc you were adding to - Ryulong's rfc - had a long comment by someone called Madman bum and angel !?! Not important, just caught my eye that's all.

I actually like the idea of a free wiki encyclopædia. I just don't like the Leninist administrators, (excluding Phaedriel, JzG, etc.) especially King Jimbo I of Sysopland. I had the idea of a free encyclopædia, but this is just too much Rightist propaganda. How can that be considered trolling?

lol

Remember The GF Ruie: admins act due to malice, not policy.

You were obviously trolling and deserved to be blocked, IMO. Ryulong is an abusive administrator who should be desysopped, but you're going about it in the completely wrong way.

Well, at least we can agree about Ryulong.

Welcome to Wikipedia Review.

Why were you "laughing out loud"? Also, trolling is a general term referring to anything the "accuser" of trolling does not like. I was only telling the truth in my opinion, Ryulong is abusing admin powers. I'm a newbie at Eng. WP and I didn't even know the cabal inside job until I found this nice website and saw many admins were abusing their superpowers.

Ryulong may indeed be abusive, but I believe in trolls as much as I believe in unicorns and faeries. They don't exist. The term originally referred to people on Usenet who would make up arguments just to start controversy. Now it is a generic term of abuse.

Trolls are people who are just out to make trouble and be obnoxious, like Wikipedia vandals but with more subtlety. Usually they're only trying to have a laugh. You can find them all over the internet, from Slashdot to YouTube and beyond. They're definitely not a myth, and they're on Wikipedia just as anywhere else.

The charge that someone is a troll is a strong one, but I don't think this fellow was truly trying to voice his concerns about Ryulong in a legitimate way. He was just causing trouble, and unfortunately that makes it even hard for legitimate complaints about Ryulong to be heard.

Apologies if I offended, but it was a funny comment.

• You mention wikipedia review (a sin on WP)
• Accuse people of being Leninist along with what appears to be a vague anti-semitic pun (not very nice!)
• Openly express a love of Daniel Brandt (a sin beyond all sins on WP)

All in all, best way to describe it is lol. I don't agree with the fact that those things get you banned, but they do. Welcome to the forum.


Are they abusing superpowers now? Superman did that at the end of Superman II, when he went back to the diner to take revenge on the bully truckdriver. Their previous interaction was water under the bridge at that point, in my opinion, and using superpowers to settle a petty dispute was ridiculous. I mean to save the world, ok use all the superpowers you have, but just to beat up a truckdriver at a diner? Come on. And let's just say I'm not the only guy that thinks that.

I am definitely not that kind of person. Although my comments might have been "uncalled for" on WP, I did not think that criticism was going to get me banned. Those comments were true, and I did not know the truth was going to be suppressed. I did not know Ryulong was one of "those admins". Thank you.


You definitely didn't offend me by saying "lol". I meant to have some humour, but not just to be controversial, and not to cause offence. I wanted to tell the truth, not get labeled a troll by some n00b biter or a hipocrite (Ryulong). I don't see how "Leninist" is anti-Semitic (It was Stalin who defeated Hitler), and mentioning my support for Wikipedia Review or Daniel Brandt should be appreciated. By blocking D. Brandt, Wikipedia should be ashamed for abusing him.

I am now blocked for a month, by Jpgordon. Even though I have attempted to enter as a new person, and proposed a plan to just "get along", Ryulong is being unwilling and cynical, with a newbie and person of my age.

It's hard to "get along" with a certified "JAGOFF" who suffers from
"Narcissistic personality disorder"

This is true of 90% of all Wikipedian admin's, considering that they
are shut in basement dwellers, who have no other interests other than
wikipedian administrating, 18/24 per day.

You have found out the wikipedia is just a MMOG game, a persistent worlds
which this"Miscreant" - lives in a world, devod and removed for the reality of the world and it's social norms, feeding his Narcissistic addiction.

Admins of Wikipeida Wikpedia admins and drone bots are evil.

Hi.

Hello Fuck Head, Wikipedian Dronebot

Note his editing history in this snapshot of the logs for August 9/10, in a 24 hour time frame...



# 01:30, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) User:Jaime Alberto dos Santos Cardoso, Porto Portugal (not a tlak page) (top)
# 01:29, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jaime Alberto dos Santos Cardoso, 1953 born in Portugal country (re-add)
# 01:29, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) User:Jaime Alberto dos Santos Cardoso, 1953 born in Portugal country (→August 2007 - use the tlak page) (top)
# 01:29, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names (→Jaime Alberto dos Santos Cardoso, 1953 born in Portugal country - close)
# 01:28, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:Viridae (→Re: RFCN post - reply)
# 01:08, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names (→Jaime Alberto dos Santos Cardoso, 1953 born in Portugal country - cm)
# 00:09, 9 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia talk:Usernames for administrator attention (→Almost all bot reports are invalid - please dont)
# 23:50, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard (→Sourcewatch - prod)
# 23:47, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Don Schrader (rem prod)

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
From 11: 53 till 23:47, this drone is down for about 12 hours for
sleep/eat/wacking off...
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


# 11:53, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 August 8 (→Riley Mason - cm)

<<<<<<<<<
5 hours down, probably going to the state office to wait in the welfare line for his state issued check.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

# 06:02, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/RockMFR 2 (→Discussion - yes please)
# 05:59, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Deletion review/Allegations of Chinese apartheid (→Section break 1 - goddamnit - move comment so it isnt in the middle of a thread - continue the thread ABOVE my comment not beloew it)
# 05:56, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Deletion review/Allegations of Chinese apartheid (→Allegations of Chinese apartheid - cm)
# 05:47, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Allegations of Chinese apartheid/Analysis by Leifern (cm)
# 04:11, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:Betacommand (→Template:Wider attention list - cm)
# 04:08, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) m Template:Wider attention list (Protected Template:Wider attention list: betacommandbot running riot. [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 04:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)))
# 04:03, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (→Some humour - cm)
# 03:05, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (→JzG - cm)
# 02:50, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Deletion review/Allegations of Chinese apartheid (→Allegations of Chinese apartheid - silly ocmment)
# 02:42, 8 August 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:Viridae (→Don Schrader - cm)
# 12:31, 7 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Deletion review/Allegations of Chinese apartheid (→Allegations of Chinese apartheid - move my comment)
# 12:30, 7 August 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Deletion review/Allegations of Chinese apartheid (→Allegations of Chinese apartheid - cm)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, for an approx 24 period, this wiki-drone is spending more than 12 hours a day
Fiddling at the wiki alter of the god of JIMBOJUICE.

I guess in Australia , you must be on welfare, since you don't have time for a "REAL JOB" to make a "REAL LIVING" in the "REAL WORLD".

CHEERS...

But he's right, though: wikipeida.org is a parked domain that redirects to offerkingdom.com, a website that tries to grab e-mail addresses from people by luring them in with a promise of a $500 "gift card" if they answer some sort of bogus survey on whether they prefer Wikipedia or the Encyclopedia Britannica. In other words, total spammers! If that isn't evil, I don't know what is...

Wikipedia admins are mostly evil too, of course, but probably no more so than the population average.

Well since you are aware I am in australia you have probobly read my WP userpage, in which case you know what I do.

It's people like you which the administrators could use as exemple to claim how the claims of unjust blocks are not justified and justify unjust blocks like mine.

You were most certainly trolling. You register an account and then succeed in supporting a banned user who's subject they consider as a bomb on Wikipedia and all this during the first month of your wiki presence without much contribution and with a controversial manner to just have some good laughts. This is a trolling. I personally disagree sensuring a website link, but the way you were doing it, it is obvious that you were acting controversial just to have some good laughts.

Fadix, It was not "a trolling". I did not do it just to get some "good laughts". I did it to tell the truth. As for my support for Daniel Brandt, such things should not matter. Admins should cfalm down with blocks. Thank you,
Ionas68224

First of, my login name here is Xidaf and I'd appreciate you call me by that name. And yes it was trolling. I have checked his contribution history to not find anything major. He was in the first month of his wiki-presence succeed in defending a banned user who he knew was very much talked about (banned, unbanned, banned unbanned history) and then provoked them by posting the link to his discussion here and laughting of it. It is because of trouble makers like him that I was banned and probably some other users here too. It's not like he was a user who was contributing and minding his own business and then abused, he actually created his own abuse and it wasn't like he was defending a case which was not heard about which would warrant such a sacrifice to inform others, when those same others were informed and by much more credible members than him. It is this sort of action that some unfit to the task admins who abuse their privilages will be using as exemple the next time an unfair block happens. I personally don't believe Daniel Brandt should have been banned because his ''disruptions'' were on the uper administrative level of Wikipedia which had no direct consequences with articles themselves but don't expect respect from me by attempting to get banned to join a community when it is users like him who I call provocators who push others into pissing matches and are protected by the AGF and cause others banning.

This is not a place for continuing edit wars. Please assume good faith. ~~~~

You signed.

I just did it to do somethin' weird.