User talk:SockingIt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This user has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia. (see: block log • contributions • page moves • current autoblocks)

This user has admitted to being a sock puppet, but is not being used abusively.

Contents 1 Why? 2 Your RfA 3 About your use of this account 4 Blocked

[edit] Why?

Not to try and reveal your identity or anything, but how old are you? THE KING 12:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

(lol) Good question. I love it! It's like being a child all over again! Personally I must agree with Tom Stoppard who says "I think age is a very high price to pay for maturity." Nevertheless my loving parents have sometimes attributed me with the age of a 12 years old. Other times I do act like the *girls and boys of my age, which would be about 22. In reality though I'm 26 ! Aren't we all the same age just at different times? Cheers. --SockingIt 15:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

I have an off-the-record question. As a sockpuppet, how you plan to deal with the threat of getting lost in the wash? --A laundromat owner 15:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Generally, I can't stand the thought of something happening that might cause someone to be blocked because they where ignorant to the rules. (ie.: They convinced they brother to help them out, a friend, etc.) I think such a block should only be temporary. I however I also can't stand the fact that they may come back with another thrilling tale of bonding and adventure. I keep an eye for these type of things and there's that inate ability to know when someone sends you an email saying "I have evidence... I'm <real name>, and <real web site>, and my friend <real name>, and <real website>" that perhaps they are telling the truth. Taking the idea that at one time, you've got it, and then you lose it, and it's gone forever can be used here. The idea is that I have the present knowlege, respect and light heartness to express to the sometimes "unknowing" or even those that activelly participate in socking that socking isn't bad in on itself but that the "rules" (as I call it the 5 F's are what will distinguish you from a good sock and a bad sock.) As a sock account and perhaps an administrator what a better way to explain and show to that the rules of wikipedia are generally fair. This will be all the more obvious and undestandable if I need to use the tools for blocking a violator. To finish of with a quote, as I seem to have been doing with my precedents, Lex Luther once said "but why get lost in it? Why not rise above the truth… and lead a good life? Shouldn’t we all look at problems as a chance for us to find… solutions?"[1] --SockingIt 16:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] About your use of this account

Please refrain from making test edits or adding inappropriate comments in Wikipedia articles. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. DMacks 15:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Given the short user contribution history it is easy to identify my contributions. You can do so by clicking here. For those of you wondering, This eidt is the only one true article, Sock puppet (internet) that was edited adding my user name in the see also. Hum... I guess I'm building a reputation and history! That could be a good but then that means I might not be a sock anymore? Oh! No I'll still be one, just a good one! --SockingIt 16:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

p.s.: Bert Blyleven is said to have some inappropriate comments one of which he mentioned that he had showered with Brett, and the guest expressed surprise. Blyleven exclaimed "Well, there were other guys there! ... Although they did say not to bend over."[2] I doubt leaving a link to a "known" internet sock puppet is innappropriate for an article that deals with preciselly that subject. --SockingIt 16:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Please stop the unhelpful, point-making edits (i.e. this). Being a harmless sock is fine, but there's no need to make sure that everyone knows it. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked per WP:POINT and the fact that you state on your userpage that you have created it "with no real reason assides to mock the sock rules. Of course you may see me adding the odd comment here and there but trully it will generally only be joke and if I need to say something serious I guess I'll use my other me!" Cbrown1023 talk 00:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I though what I was doing was truly within the orders and Wiki rules. WP:POINT indicates that it usually some sort of Parody or breach of experiment. I didn't know it was disruptive to vote on AfD or to say that I'm a sock! I think it would be interesting to have a third opinion on this. I am truthfully trying to make an account that is considered a sock puppet and that will respect the rules. In think this could be a matter of taste on the opinions being expressed on my user page and that this doesn't really have very much to do with my edits. Even if I did, jokingly put, no comment, on a couple Afds I doubt that it was truly a disruptive WP:POINT. But since you says so, I do apologize and will makes some edits to my user page in the next 4 - 5 days. To be perfectly frank, I am not angry at anything or anyone about any rules here on Wikipedia. I do not want to change the rules. I am trying to respect those rules in the best of ways all while maintaining my self image (which includes a little humour on my user page). But when it comes to actually editing you will notice there is nothing really egregiously disruptive. As per WP:POINT, "Egregious disruption of any kind is blockable by any administrator — for up to one month in the case of repeat offenses that are highly disruptive." Not to be rude or anything but perhaps you may have jumped the boat here on giving me more than 1 month of a block. I think that if the standard is to give an indefinite block perhaps it should be written in the guideline. (Humm… the paradox arrives, but I still don’t want to change the rules. I’m just saying that let’s be reasonable here! We shouldn’t give the death penalty to someone when in fact the general consensus is that he gets 1 month in jail! Again, I think it would be interesting to see what the community has to say about having a dedicated sock account that, hopefully, or in my case, tries to respects all the rules. Again, I appologize if my user page offends you and I will see to reviewing it's content. Your truly, Thank you. (I forgot to sign this sometime approx. 17:30 UTC)

• You might perhaps use the unblock template with a summary of what you just said. I see nothing wrong with a harmless sock, but I think that an account with no purpose except to mock the rules, coupled with those edits to afd may be pushing to disruption. "No comment" really adds nothing to the debate. I think the situation is a little funny per your intent, but you may be going about it the wrong way. Correct me if I am reading the situation incorrectly, regards Navou ^banter 17:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Your advice and summary of the issue appears to be pretty fair. I would say it may even be ironic! I will need to think this sock account all over. My main, present, concern is the fear that this entire user account be deleted. As, I've said, I'm a firm believer in honour and trying to respect the rules. I may just take your advice, however I just sent an email Cbrown, politely asking him if he could review this. So I think I'll just wait a little for now! :) Thank you again! --SockingIt 17:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

You say that WP:POINT specifies a blocking time of up to 1 month, but you are fogetting WP:SOCK. You were blocked for that as well (see block log). A user account should be used to contribute to the encyclopedia and not just vote "no comment" in AfDs and crack jokes (possibly WP:TROLL, another thing you could be classified and blocked as). Socks aren't that bad, and can even by clearly stated User:Sock of Steel359, but you are normally supposed to state your real username (though that is not a necessity). They are also supposed to do more than what you do on this account. Furthermore, edits like this are not a good idea, and can be labeled as vandalism. You may request to be unblocked through the unblock mailing list or by using Template:Unblock. Cbrown1023 talk 00:38, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I agree with the idea of making a point. Obviously, going around and saying, I'm a sock I can't give a comment is kind of silly and perhaps a childish way of making a point. The sock puppet block doesn't make sense... oh! Never mind, I see at the start they say "disruptive." Again, I appologize for placing the no comment on the afds which is a point, but the only thing to which it was really disruptive is, when you think about it, the administrator, such as you, that decided to check into my account and perhaps the people that are going to read over the text in the future and wonder what the heck! Oh! And maybe... Wow! That leaves the rest of the world for anytime I talk. If anyone thinks I say something that is slighly stupid (or disruptive) then I can be blocked. Humm! I guess I'd best be at good behaviour and do as I had said on my user page; Avoid all those votes and leaving comments. (Again, I'll have to re-think a couple things and as you showed, my edits will need to improve. (ie.: be for article improvement but without creating any "disruption" to the community.) --SockingIt 22:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)