RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive35

Protecting ATIM/Coop
Right now the Coop is indef protected by JD because of the occasional BON showing up to argue bad faith cases which just wastes our time. Given this happened just earlier (see up above), should we extent this to ATIM as well/should we keep these pages protected to autoconfirmed users in general? This is a somewhat open discussion, because right now it's informal, although I am leaning towards page protection for ATIM as well. 16:04, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * There's practically no valid use case for a random internet using this page. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 16:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Same here. — Oxyaena Harass  18:06, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Considering this page often (some might say depressingly often) takes the role of "backup coop" it makes sense we should give it similar protections.-Flandres (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Protected it then. 19:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * So if a BoN has a grievance, they don't get a voice?-Hastur! (talk) 02:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think semi-protect is ideal but they still have a voice, they just can't immediately go on this page. They'll have to request a moderator for input. I've had a few BoNs tell me they couldn't comment or edit a page (or talk page?) and I just opened editing for them. It's not a big deal. I suppose maybe some BoNs aren't assertive enough to ask a moderator and languish but I hope that's not a frequent case. 02:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

2607:fb90::/32
Might be a target for a long-term range block if we have issues from it.

The range is all of T-Mobile's IPv6 addresses. (1) This may seem ridiculous, but the issue with this range is whenever cellular data is turned off and on, a new IP is assigned. The worst part is, they are not from a /64 like residential and business ipv6 ranges. They are from any IP in the range. I know at least 2 LTAs use this, from comparing IP editor behavior patterns to account behavior patterns, I can send evidence via email if needed. If it's a legitimate user, they can just turn off cellular data and connect via a Wi-Fi network. That way, they can't change IPs rapidly like that. This may be a stupid idea, but also see this. Sievert 81 (talk) 05:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * We have rarely agreed to range blocks, and the last time there was agreement it was narrow and of relatively short duration. Bongolian (talk) 07:32, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The BoN in question has been a persistent pain in the ass wrt this wiki for years. It's not unprecedented to use a rangeblock on his various IPs. See Archive 17 of this very page for details. — Oxyaena Harass  10:24, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * We can block the range for anonymous editing only. Not disabling signups, just disabling anonymous editing. That said, I'm very wary of blocking the complete assigned IP range of T-Mobile. 11:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That's fair, but IIRC you weren't here for the epicenter of the Morris drama. He likes making sockpuppet accounts too. — Oxyaena Harass  11:59, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I strongly object to rangeblocking a complete ISP if that includes disabling account registrations. Get a sense of scale. 12:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I believe that a rangeblock for anonymous users only would be justified, (I mean that IP range is globally blocked on Wikimedia: metawikipedia:Special:Contributions/2607:fb90::/32) but it should be at most pi months. Pi year rangeblocks aren't the greatest idea on here, unlike on Meta. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 13:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Links to evidence would be helpful-Hastur! (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Fuck off, Hastur. — Oxyaena Harass  14:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No, Hastur is right for the IP range specifically. A few example diffs of various IPs in this range being abusive would be extremely helpful in making me make up my mind on this matter. 15:39, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FB90:929D:3F6:A4D0:399E:616D:8BD0 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FB90:4296:828F:816B:761C:979A:AF4E https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FB90:9330:A51D:A85B:5022:A7B3:3049 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FB90:4280:EFFE:8CA5:DD78:7BED:94DE in the last few days. I suspect a lot of socks and vandalism account use this range too. Sievert 81 (talk) 16:18, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * So:
 * BoN 2607:FB90:4296:828F:816B:761C:979A:AF4E admitted to being the banned CP user Morris (User talk:Sirius)
 * Morris thereby incidentally admitted to causing grief on RW with a series of T-Mobile BoNs (a behavior that he previously performed on T-Mobile).
 * Morris claimed that Oxy & Dysk were stalking him (though Morris himself has actually been convicted of stalking IRL according to public records).
 * (who postdates the original Morris drama) upon hearing the information that it is Morris suddenly believes that Morris was unjustly banned (RationalWiki:Chicken coop).
 * Something is quite fishy here, like perhaps IveBeenFrank=Morris? Bongolian (talk) 19:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Can we not do the Blank=Morris game again? 19:11, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This is getting ridiculous. Please don't act like Conservapedia admins-please! I am not a sock-is it so absurd to believe that a sysop who was banned without a coop vote should be unblocked? IveBeenFrank (talk) 19:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Morris did mention he had an account here that's so far gone unnoticed..... — Oxyaena Harass  19:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

I am absolutely opposed to reopening any of the old bans unless the banned person makes the appeal themselves. The reason for this is that the rules on banning were not codified as they are today. Perhaps in some cases the rules were not strictly enforced at the time, but so what? It's a total waste of time rehashing these bad actors' cases, and I think that raising the issue of questioning past judgments that have not been objected to in months or years does not show good faith editing. Bongolian (talk) 19:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I mean, Frank is an idiot. — Oxyaena Harass  20:01, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If I'm an idiot, then you're still using teething rings. IveBeenFrank (talk) 20:07, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * , But what shall we do with the IP range? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 20:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Quit acting like children. Let Morris appeal the ban in the coop. Vote. Easy. 20:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * God, fucking Morris and Oxy again. Fuck sake... Acefuck the bozos 20:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Someone is welcome to suggest a range block. Personally, I am opposed to blocking an entire ISP. I am opposed to range blocks that are as narrow as possible. I am opposed to excessively long range blocks. Given that inducing RW to range block appears to be one of Morris' strategies, any blocks should be as judicious as possible. Bongolian (talk) 20:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * We really do need range block policy for IPv6, single address blocking is completely untenable due to the fact that address hopping is so -so- much more of a bigger issue. 20:55, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m going to block it for pi days, if there are no objections. If that works, we will consider a much longer block. Sievert 81 (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Can I block open proxies? Since we have a DSNBL blocker, I assume they are not allowed. I have an idea on how to find them, and that would also lessen the disruptions. Sievert 81 (talk) 21:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Page moves are now sysop right only.
That fixes the recent spam issue I think. Notifying moderators here as well as the mob in general of this change. If it is desired we can vote on it. 22:21, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Mike. Thanks, Morris. — Oxyaena Harass  22:23, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Good. The way it should be. (I'm surprised that this wasn't already the case. Takes of the hassle of having to lock moving for individual pages a great deal.) -- Goatspeed. 23:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sensible, a freshly created account shouldn't be able to move pages. I'm also surprised that this precaution wasn't already in place, and even more surprised that our recent friend is seemingly the first troll to really exploit it. --RWRW (talk) 06:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

GeeJayK was/is a ban evasion of IPs 2804:214:81DB:72DF:1:2:CCA7:2F2C, 2804:14c:5b72:856c:e4a5:71f4:2df5:57fb, and 2804:214:81de:615e:1:2:c299:18cc, and multiple usernames
Or I guess instead of ban evasion, the better term is 'sock abuse'  Don't wanna edit the heading now cuz I linked it various places. I had gone onto the support chat Discord for RW and asked what to do with sock abusers and they said to block.

But they also did ban evasion as well, I mean they would clutter talk pages with sock IPs on CircularReasonings talk page, my talk page etc mere minutes into a block in the past

One example of their sock abuse is if you ctl+f for them calling "edit wars" "edition wars" in the talk and the archive of the talk page of, "MMT", a consistently odd spelling mistake. Same with consistent arguments they made, but they were not blocked for their viewpoints ever. They were initially temp blocked ***Not by me****, but by CircularReasoning, Oxyaena, and CosmikDebris for edit warring and ban evasions, (not ideological reasons) as well as likely anti-Semitism spam and trolling seen in the talk page history of the, "MMT", page. It came to a head where I indeffed him after this https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMe%3F&type=revision&diff=2275206&oldid=2275191 and was told by moderator, "Spud", to go here and clear it before doing anything like that again, (and Spud threatened Coop if I didn't) and so I will go here in the future instead of relying on saloon bar and talk pages. But GeeKay did come back after getting unblocked and I indeffed him again for ban evasion/sock abuse. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 01:37, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Seeing all the accounts and IPs on MMT talk page might make one believe it's just a popular talk page, but no, it's just 90% a running list of GeeJayK socks, as they all have the same odd spelling mistakes, such as calling edit wars "Edition wars", https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Modern_Monetary_Theory/Archive1 https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Modern_Monetary_Theory and the exact same arguments and they are all sequential in a way that made it obvious to circ, oxy, and me it is the same guy. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 01:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

They also like to gloat or troll about their activities in various places eg here https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMe%3F&type=revision&diff=2275206&oldid=2275191 and here https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Neiltyson1fan#.22Antissemitism.22 Neiltyson1fan (talk) 01:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

On my talk page they also said they've "Been here since 2018", but a quick look at their contribs show they pretty much only cared about the MMT page. Other https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=GeeJayK+&namespace=&tagfilter=&year=2021&month=-1 Oxy had also suspected User:VoiceOf was another sockNeiltyson1fan (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't log in here much so I hope this is enough, I'm not doing a book report on a troll I've had to deal with for a long time now. That means I will not participate in any further drama about this in mod/talk pages and will let others give their 2 cents if Spud escalates it. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * From the 3 IPs + the GeeJayK account, I don't see evidence of block evasion (no editing while on a different account while blocked). There was evidence of edit warring on the MMT talkpage, but wasn't that already punished? Bongolian (talk) 02:12, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * They edited my talk page and Circular's while blocked, and they cycled IPs fast Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * In the first few days of January, eg https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Neiltyson1fan#.22Antissemitism.2

Guys, stop feeding the troll already. Dunno why y'all keep engaging with bad-faith commenters like this. --Goatspeed. See what I'm up toCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments 01:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC) I dunno, I don't really like having proxy abusers on my talk page, now at 4 (known)IPs and counting, so to get this over with go ahead and file whatever you were going to file, mr IP editor, so it can be dismissed and you can go about your day sooner. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:10, 4 January 2021 (UTC) Alrighty, since this is getting funny, I guess I'll play with this troll a bit (not you Neilty, you're okay): I'd gladly dismiss [a coop on Neiltyson1fan involving your socks] like the courts did the suit to give Pence the dictatorial power to override the will of voters and the Donald's many other absurd lawsuits. --Goatspeed. See what I'm up toCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments ::02:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC) Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:18, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * "Fine, so I'll revert again and we'll have a editions war.2804:14C:5B72:856C:E4A5:71F4:2DF5:57FB (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)""||| https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AModern_Monetary_Theory%2FArchive1&type=revision&diff=2274609&oldid=2274279}}
 * "If wanted to make this edition (I said I wouldn't since didn't even have time) I had more I, I would use my own account. Why would I use a sock puppet for that? Aren't you ashamed?2804:14C:5B72:8BC8:B976:D638:E893:9279 (talk) 14:35, 21 January 2021 (UTC) https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AModern_Monetary_Theory&type=revision&diff=2275514&oldid=2275249
 * ^^ 2804:14C:5B72:856C:E4A5:71F4:2DF5:57FB and associated IPS --> 2804:14C:5B72:8BC8:B976:D638:E893:9279 --> GeeKay Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:26, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Also Spud has now, for a second time, threatened sanctions on me (through actions on the sock, like some double-thing) for indeffing this clear sock, and acted like he'd have final say on the matter, I'm logging off so I don't have to deal with a troll trying to start a coop, now with the help of a mod, and I also will not participate in any related coop. t\The first message Circ gave to me over this matter was a playful ban over engaging with this series of socks ever in the first place. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)


 * So, let’s Neiltyson1fan the “evidence” here:
 * The first “evidence” is that someone made a similar typo. Neiltyson1fan said no one ever used this typo. Wikipedia says something different. This same typo, hundreds of times. Am I really behind all those edits on Wikipedia too?
 * Actually on RW, “Edition” was used as a synonym of “edit” some times. I'm not even the first.
 * Now, the most important proof I have that I’m not the other guy. I checked the his IP. He is from the same country as I am, but we don’t have the same ISP and live more than 300 miles apart Makes sense we made the same typo. “Edit wars” doesn’t make sense in Brazilian Portuguese, but “Edição” does. A false cognate from a country where the MMT discussion is almost as hot as in US (and, according to Francis Fukuyama, even more polarized). Would I travel in a middle of a pandemic just to edit a Wiki?
 * The arguments I used are not the same, as Neiltyson1fan said. I said that Greg Mankiw abused of Credentialism when he talked about MMT. The other guy  was abusing of credentialism.
 * I said I was not going to make the edition Neiltyson1fan banned me for. I posted more sources and he said we could use them. “user:Me?”, who reverted his edition, posted my old version. Why would I add something that even I said needs improvement, without even adding the new sources?
 * He said he was going to coop Neiltyson1fan. I said I wouldn’t even if I had more reason to (he only had a three days ban, I got a permaban). In fact, I still don’t want to as I don’t believe this kind of method works and I don’t have enough time for that.
 * Another obvious questionn My account is from 2018. Why wouldn’t I use it if I wanted to edit the article? Neiltyson1fan said I only care about the MMT article. Well, actually my first article was about Walter Block. The other guy was an Austrian, as Neiltyson1fan said. You can see how much I like them on the article I wrote. In any case, Neiltyson1fan made a non sequitur here.
 * I call it a day (again, I don't want to coop you), and I'm already fed up with your bad reasoning. GeeJayK (talk) 02:51, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Same non-Anglo-Saxon country, same habit of trying to evade bans, same manipulating, same trolling, same exact arguments about credentialism, same mispellings, contribs show only having contributed to this article and related ones, multiple users agreeing with me on the talk page, what other evidence am I supposed to give? And I don't know how you got Spud on your side, if through an email or what, but the reason you don't want a coop is because you know you'll be sanctioned.  I don't care about a coop, but I'm not participating in this or anything related to this anymore unless you keep editing articles.Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure. Same country with a larger population as UK, Germany and France all put together, more distant from each other than Madrid and Lisbon, and as I said, different arguments. Again, do you really think I drove 300 miles just to post here? The other users were talking about someone else, not me. The rest of your post is just non sequitur, so I won't answer. And before I forget, I will edit the MMT article next week. Don't vandalize it again. GeeJayK (talk) 02:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not getting sucked into this troll vortex again, not doing it, I don't care you got a single mod to overblow this when everyone else saw you as an obvious troll (oxy, cosmik, circ etc) Neiltyson1fan (talk) 03:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oxyeana, CircularReasoning, and CosmikDebris are the only other relevant people as they were the only other ones dealing with the subject, you and Spud trying to make this about me is dumb and not gonna let it happen, especially when circ said he'd shoot down any more trolling from you as quoted above.  03:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Among those you've mentioned, the only one that talked to me was Oxyaena. Dunno about the rest. GeeJayK (talk) 03:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oxy called you a troll account on this account and the rest, particularly circ, directly engaged with and temp blocked at least one of your socks. Circ witnessed you block evading during a block under multiple IPs and so did I, and I asked on the support Discord (under willwill25#3138) what to do and they said to block persistent, socks. The reason dropdown on special:block says to indef persistent socks, but I waited for weeks to do what the dropdown says to do regarding your series of IPs/accounts  Neiltyson1fan (talk) 03:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If I'm one of those elite "trolls" you're talking about can you please explain why are our Geolocations so different? Why was he praising the Austrians while I was bashing them (even outside the MMT article)? Why don't I share his love for argument from authority? Why did I add an edit that I said was lame and needed more sources?  Why I didn't use my account to make those edits in the first place? Why I am making such a fuss about this if I'm a troll that can evade like you said? I don't bear the burden of proof, but I could provide evidence I'm not who you think I am. GeeJayK (talk) 04:07, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * None of them were praising Austrian economics, but rather abusing socks while defending a closely related school. You're trying to get me to talk about economic schools so you can shift the discussion to me being too left-wing or whatever, this is about the fact that you have been sock abusing and temp ban evading (and now indef evading) using the same mispellings, arguments, obsessions, and with multiple people (who actually engaged with the page, not distant observers) coming to the same conclusion.  Every time you got blocked you'd come back and say something like "aren't you ashamed, I'm *going* to come back to this article", and then when you'd get blocked again you'd create another alt account to vandalize or troll, the latest one was the User:Me? account and related ones bragging about vandalizing https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMe%3F&type=revision&diff=2275206&oldid=2275191, and then reverting back to your, what all your socks call, "edition", https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Modern_Monetary_Theory&type=revision&diff=2275210&oldid=2275207.  It's "revision" btw. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 04:19, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Again. Why would I make this revision with another user account, especially considering how I said I was a lame edit on Talk and could be improved? I wasn't blocked when "Me?" reverted your edit. In fact, I've never been blocked before, you can check the log if you want to. Also, it's funny how you keep pretending how a different geolocation (300 miles!) in the middle of a fucking pandemic isn't important. GeeJayK (talk) 04:30, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * This particular iteration of your account has been blocked three times by me. User:Me? reverted to your revision you wanted on the talk page, and also vandalized https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMe%3F&type=revision&diff=2275206&oldid=2275191.  Your previous IP accounts were at least temp blocked by multiple people and your GeeKay account was getting nowhere on talk, with Oxy accusing VoiceOf of being the IPs referenced in the heading "Oh no, the troll's back. — Oxyaena Harass 22:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)", and then User:Me? showed up and vandalized.  This pattern happened multiple times.   Now you're just going to say you are not anyone but GeeKay and that Oxy and I are wrong because the locations of some of your socks are in the same country but miles away, on a talk page where there was only one person from your non-anglo-saxon talking about a complicated subject sequentially, with the same arguments about credentialism and the same ban evading.  Neiltyson1fan (talk) 04:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

As others have pointed out on numerous talk pages, all the evidence you've provided is only circumstantial. Do not ban with such little evidence unilaterally, unless they're really obvious like the Ken, Morris, Mikey, and especially the GR "Crowtin" socks. -- Goatspeed. 04:44, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Without a checkuser function, afaik all evidence will be this type unless or until he comes out under another account and gloats.  I guarantee you he will be there on the article forever, under multiple accounts, unless you indef him, giving him and everyone a clear noticeNeiltyson1fan (talk) 04:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You could even ban me from the article for indeffing a user, and he'll still be there no matter what that doesn't involve him being totally banned from the article. There isn't even anything I have to add to the article.  Neiltyson1fan (talk) 04:49, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh, and assuming bad faith on Spud's part without any proof is also pretty bad form. I've known him for a while and mostly trust his judgement. -- Goatspeed. 04:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm sure he's a great guy, but I indeffed a clear sock, and he will be there forever unless given a clear notice, no matter what your opinion is on me or Spud. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 04:54, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Alexa, !remindme 5 monthsNeiltyson1fan (talk) 04:55, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, CircularReasoning. Neiltyson1fan used you as an exemple of someone who called me a troll, case closed, I believe. I don't usually hold grudges, so if you want to see me on Talk:Modern Monetary Theory or anywhere else here that's ok, Neiltyson1fan, even if I'll probably create my user page before anything else. GeeJayK (talk) 04:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * aka a mod bowing to a trustee member who had no previous knowledge on this when circ had previously said

Guys, stop feeding the troll already. Dunno why y'all keep engaging with bad-faith commenters like this. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments 01:46, 4 January 2021 (UTC) I dunno, I don't really like having proxy abusers on my talk page, now at 4 (known)IPs and counting, so to get this over with go ahead and file whatever you were going to file, mr IP editor, so it can be dismissed and you can go about your day sooner. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 02:10, 4 January 2021 (UTC) Alrighty, since this is getting funny, I guess I'll play with this troll a bit (not you Neilty, you're okay): I'd gladly dismiss it like the courts did the suit to give Pence the dictatorial power to override the will of voters and the Donald's many other absurd lawsuits. --Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments 02:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't you think you're taking this too serious? You said two hours ago you were leaving, but you're still here. It's not healthy to obsess with people you met on the Internet. GeeJayK (talk) 05:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, this user: GeeJayK, is a troll account Neiltyson1fan (talk) 05:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * GeeJayK is a pretty clear troll account. I support Neil. — Oxyaena Harass  09:53, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay so I'm trying to wrap my head around this, so bear with me here while I try to condense this entire block into something more concise (seriously, writing a lead helps when presenting your case): You are trying to tell us that a user on this wiki, GeeJayK may or may not be certain IPv6s based on what is mostly circumstantial evidence (some of which has been noted to be weak by CR) and might be User:Me?, all based over an edit dispute over the Modern Monetary Theory article. The argument you are bringing forth is that GJK is engaging in sockpuppet abuse based on this by engaging in arguments on the talkpage, as well as edit warring the main article. If I'm wrong, please correct me, but this is the argument as I understand it.
 * Firstly, let me establish that having a sockpuppet account in and of itself is not forbidden. It only becomes forbidden if the account is used deliberately to mask as a different user or is used to avoid community sanctions that have been placed on ones presence. Secondly, I will flat out throw away the argument that User:Me? is GJK. Me? was blocked for moving users talkpages around and blanking our own article and has a grand total of one edit to MMT. Seems to me much more like Me? is just an incarnation of our page moving troll that we put a stop to a few days ago. As for the IPv6 addresses, if they are edit warring, you can always just... lock the page. It's there for a reason. Sysop only if you must, and if the argument is between sysops, ask a mod to do it to mod level. That's what it's for. Moving on to the arguments on the talkpage, they are are supposed to follow CD. That is, we don't block users for merely arguing over the subject of a page. GJK at the moment to my understanding (this is based on peripheral route processing, I am NOT an economist) has followed CD while the IPv6s have not. I have as a result protected the talkpage for 3 months from editing by anonymous users.
 * Hopefully this decision will result in making it obvious if GJK is socking as alternate user accounts. If GJK was editing as those IPv6s to deliberately misrepresent his behavior as coming from multiple people, a claim which I doubt (we have no real solid connections from GJK to the IPv6s yet unless GJK admits it), since IPv6 has a natural roll-over (hence why to put a stop to IPv6 spammers we really need a sort of rangeblock policy for them alone, but that's not for now), then that particular way of misrepresenting his argument will be cut down for now. Keep a close eye on GJK and proof that he's registering alternate users or the actual BONs with stronger evidence than similar typos (identical arguments from multiple users is a stronger argument than "they had the same argument as a BON had that we banned"). GJK to my perspective at the moment does not meet the criteria for any kind of block. 12:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd just like to say that I'm not actually on anybody's side. At the moment. And I'm definitely not on any kind of power trip. Go ahead and question my authority all you like. I just want things done fairly. Spud (talk) 13:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't beat yourself up over it. You did the right thing by telling Neil to take this to ATIM. 15:27, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * GeeJayK's socks used multiple IPs to comment on talk pages while banned. This was clear to Circ and myself as shown on the second to last section on my talk page before a trustee got involved.  I'm not doing a book report on something obvious to everyone before trustee got involved.  The evidence cant take the form of checkuser because we don't have that, but there are not multiple people taking turns to edit the MMT talk page from Brazil to say the exact same things with the same misspellings, arguments about credentialism, grudges against me, and attitude (unless it's multiple people organized).  And the socks were temp banned for trolling activity by at least 3 users. And the sockpuppet article, says sockpuppeting is 'forbidden' from the website in the lede of the page, https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Sockpuppet&oldid=1997995 and he's used at least 5-7 socks (so far) for trolling activity in less than a  month, most around the first few days of Jan.  As far as :User:Me?, I guess it's just a coincidence him and all the other made up accounts in the history of that page, always reverted to GeeJayK's exact same general arguments or lashed out when they weren't getting their way on talk.  Oxy agrees with me, and Circ did before a trustee got involved.  One of his socks were also temp banned by Cosmic.  Either this site takes a stand against consistently banned users and socks to troll or it doesn't.  I was told in RW support Discord that it does.Neiltyson1fan (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It is amazing how you didn't even realized that the BoNs were from Brazil before I told you. Still waiting for your explanations about the different geolocation between me and the IP. Also, let's suppose I'm one of those IPs. The last time one of them edit was three weeks ago. You blocked me because of the edit made by user Me?. Regarding Sirius question, my edits and arrguments are totally different. I even criticized points that the IP used as "arguments" against MMT. GeeJayK (talk) 15:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm done here on ATIM. If you want to talk about something else you know where to find me. GeeJayK (talk) 16:01, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's clear you don't speak English well, but that doesn't mean anything in and of itself. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  16:18, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, first things first. By your own admission, you aren't here a lot. I'll actually put down my foot now and say that I have no reason to believe GJK is Me?. In case you missed it, in the past week we had to deal with an asshat moving major pages around on the wiki (suspicions are that it might have been a CP troll or mikemikev, but nothing concise beyond just a suspicion). Me? fits that pattern far better than being a GJK sock, of which you seem to show little proof since the only connection is a single fucking edit to MMT. Secondly, I still have not seen any evidence outright connecting GJK to the BON editor (it's honestly just one, most of them share the same general range and dynamic IPs are designed to be a part of IPv6 because of the insane amount of available IPs) other than a case of "they have similar typing errors", which has been pointed out to you those typing errors are not tied to them alone, which makes this circumstantial evidence. Furthermore, GJKs edit history looks mostly normal right up until they got into an argument with you on MMT, creating a page on a crank and expanding what we have on Ludwig von Mises Institute. This to me looks rather different from what the BON editor seems to have been doing which seems to mostly be needling you specifically. Neil, I'm gonna level with you; the evidence you present to connect GJK to the BON is weak, your understanding of how IPv6 rotation works is non-existent which causes you to see multiple editors where there really just is only one BON editor and your evidence to connect Me? to GJK is so tangential it's borderline "People sit on chairs" degrees of evidence. I suggest you drop the case before you embarass yourself further. 16:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * After chatting with Siruis on discord about this, I've agreed to drop it as only Oxy agrees with me at this point. Also, the BoN explicitly said he was unplugging his modem multiple times a day to avoid bans on RW, so trying to make this about me and particulars about IPV6 is not interesting or relevant.Neiltyson1fan (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'll also stop editing the MMT page and the MMT talk page that aren't in my own userspace here User:Neiltyson1fan/Nice version of MMT page as I don't want to engage anymore with GeeKay Neiltyson1fan (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

In future, when you make a case against someone, lay out the details clearly as Sirius noted above, then give links that clearly show the evidence for violations of RationalWiki:Community Standards or other agreed-upon rules of behavior (e.g., civility, as mentioned in Community Standards). That way, people who have not been following along don't have to go back and try to figure out what actually transpired. Bongolian (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, no problem. I will always come here for matters of long-term bans in the future, before doing any such action.  I should have used this place instead of Saloon Bar back when this was happening in early Jan, and it's my fault for not finding this place sooner. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your understanding. Hopefully, it will not be as fraught if this happens again. Bongolian (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If this happens with other people, maybe there's a way for server admins to limit indef to mods, if indefs need to go through mods noticeboard first instead of other channels Neiltyson1fan (talk) 19:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)


 * That won't be necessary. Such mistakes are easily correctable, and it doesn't make sense to make access to permabanning so limited, especially given the large amount of obvious ban evasions we get on a daily basis- and those are permaban-on-sight. -- Goatspeed. 01:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

One of the IPs, which is clear is GeeKay from contextual evidence, is from Brazil according to whois. whois evidence revision — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  09:57, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I wish you'd stop with your creepy IP sleuthing. You're a little unhinged. Go for a walk, meet some friends, jerk smack or jerk off. AceSimple Maze 10:45, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * He hasn't denied being from Brazil. Spud (talk) 12:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually, I said I am from Brazil. Four or five times. That was my biggest point. Me and BoN have a different ISP and live 500 km apart. As much as I would love to visit my grandparents, do you think I would drive 500 km in the middle of a pandemic just to post here? You can check here if you want to. GeeJayK (talk) 15:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I noticed Brazilian IPs in MMT talk when checking on ipqualityscore.com in early Jan, cuz they were being rapidly cycled during temp bans on talk pages, and the BoN had discussed unplugging his modem multiple times a day as a reasoning for the cycling that is more rapid than normal dynamic IP cycling, after being confronted about using language where it seemed he was pretending to be different people. And yes that qualified as sockpuppeting given the way it was done at the time if it was you, I'm not anywhere near the first to use the term "IP sock puppet" anywhere on the internet, contrary to what sirius implied in discord and here. The term "IP sock puppet" Is mentioned over 100 times on Wikipedia to refer to non-user accounts, not mentioning variants like 'anonymous sock puppet' used on Wikipedia to refer to non-user accounts. But I never mentioned Brazil then afaik, because I think there's some loose site guideline about not discussing IP user location, which might not apply to this particular mod board.  You have all the mods on your side on this issue for now, you're not getting banned again by me. Even if Oxy banned you, you'd likely survive an escalation on RW From the issue in the short term due to mods. Time will tell about further connections or lack thereof to the BoN, but even if you act up, I'm recusing myself from ever banning you just to move on from this. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 17:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * A few points. 1 If it's so easy to evade bans here, RW should consider an evercookie, or maybe rangebans. I spent half of my lunch break reverting vandalism today and bans didn't seem capable of stopping them. 2 Don't you think that maybe you're taking it on a personal level? I how you talked to Spud on your talkpage, and that wasn't very nice, man. Also, you said I'm "spewing Friedmanesque garbage", but my main source on the MMT article were Larry Summers, Olivier Blanchard and Gregory Mankiw You can see what saltwater economists think about Chicago and Minnesota here. 3 maybe you should use "Show preview" more often. You've just edited this page 15 times right now, for instance. GeeJayK (talk) 17:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Not engaging with this trolling trying to get me to talk about Larry Summers XD, or to try to get me angry at you again, I'm not banning you. (Nor am I indeffing anyone without going here first now and getting consensus from mods) So you don't need to worry about me.  Neiltyson1fan (talk) 18:01, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hold on, if GeeJayK is a troll, why isn't he banned indefinitely? I kept seeing his username pop up everywhere on the wiki. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Put simply, I'm not a troll. Thanks for asking. GeeJayK (talk) 16:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, I haven't paid enough attention to this to know if GeeJayK's a troll or not and if he is how severe the condition is. But we're somewhat more tolerant of trolling than, say, Wikipedia. This wiki was founded in part to troll Conservapedia. And though we've moved ahead from those days, we still mostly tolerate mild and easily reverted trolling. Even "excessive trolling of talk pages" is only a cause for moderate up to 3.14 months) block. Permaban generally requires pretty extreme diagnosis of assholiness. 10:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

PROДP
I see that there is severe ongoing spam involving the term "PROДP" coming from various BoNs, and I found one named user called. I also noticed some mention of the so-called "DPAUK" in a deleted page called PROДP. So... JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 12:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I added it to the AbuseFilter. 12:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Seems we have some reddit activity related to this term: -pretty interesting. IveBeenFrank (talk) 13:08, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I joined that Discord server and they said "I will not stop unless you delete your ED article". I don't know why but... they did. Feel free to join it. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 13:10, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * May I remind you two to DFTT. 13:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Ah right, including slurs.... Typical. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  14:25, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Kevlarstar/Tuxer edit warring
Kevlarstar and Tuxer have been edit warring on the WIGO elections page. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  10:39, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Tuxer made the WIGO in question in the first place. His wording should remain, whether the politician mentioned is literally a neo-nazi or not. It's been long established that fucking around with other peoples WIGOs is not Kosher and if you don't like them you should just downvote. 10:54, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd also like to note that it could have been avoided if the editing user asked the WIGO owner beforehand. CommanderOzEvolved (talk) (contribs) 12:44, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Bullshit. I've edited WIGO entries in the past for clarity when they turned out to be incoherent or producing endless disputes. The person in question is far right and his party formally disavowed neonazis (but then supported them indirectly in the way far right euro parties usually do). Calling him a neonazi is an inaccuracy. Our WIGOs should serve to be as accurate as possible, as they are uncredited (meaning the libel shotgun idiots are likely to go for RW first) and duplicates are frowned upon. Far right is adequate here and a middle ground between Tuxer and Kevlarstars additions. 13:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Sirius hath it right! Especially with the "Bullshit" comment. Scream!! (talk) 14:58, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I also completely agree with Sirius (even though, in my opinion, he recently completely rewrote one of my WIGOs in a way I think was unnecessary). I make minor changes to WIGOs all the time to correct bad English. And the idea of downvoting a WIGO just because you don't like the way it's written, frankly, that's ridiculous. Spud (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If a WIGO is bad it needs only to be downvoted-Hastur! (talk) 15:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * For badly sourced WIGOs I agree, this is about the description of a WIGO. 15:57, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

. Bongolian (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess my attempt at conflict resolution failed. CommanderOzEvolved (talk) (contribs) 23:04, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's happening a lot today. Apologies for all of us for letting you down. 23:07, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

“Historians have a word for Germans who joined the Nazi party, not because they hated Jews, but out of a hope for restored patriotism, or a sense of economic anxiety, or a hope to preserve their religious values, or dislike of their opponents, or raw political opportunism, or convenience, or ignorance, or greed. That word is "Nazi." Nobody cares about their motives anymore.” ― A.R. Moxon

André Ventura is a nazi, there have been multiple incidents of Nazi salutes (sources in Portuguese, sorry) at his party's meetings. And even if he "disavowed" nazis, it's just falls under the "very nice people in both sides" of Donald Trump (who, btw, disavowed nazis after Charlottesville in an interview). It was bullshit when Trump did it, and it is bullshit when Ventura did it.—Tuxer (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Move Draft:Minimal facts argument to mainspace
There is sufficiently information for this page to appear in mainspace. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 20:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Goatspeed. 20:37, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Neiltyson1fan stripped of sysop right
has had their sysop bit removed by. Stated reason is "To prevent edit warring on the Incel.co talkpage." As per the CS, this is technically permissible if there's an emergency, which this arguably can be seen as, but it does require us to vote and discuss on this now.

As per procedure, I am opening an ATIM case (move to Coop if it gets heated!) on Neiltyson1fan to determine further actions. Related diff is probably this one where Neiltyson1fan repeatedly tries to remove an AfD template. Also related is this cleanup of BON spam(?) that Neiltyson1fan reverted back into the page several times. My understanding is that both of these incidents led to a removal of sysop bit. I personally do agree with this rights removal as this is the third time that Neiltyson1fan has been called out for behavior, as I verbally warned him before about on Talk:Incel + happened in the history ATIM with his MMT discussion, however we should discuss and vote on whether or not we decide to give Neiltyson1fan a greater punishment such as instating of sysoprevoke or whether this should be boomeranged back on GC (the latter of which I'm not feeling particularly inclined towards given GCs own behavior, but it might be an appropriate response for some I suppose). 18:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Grammarcommie, who was the one edit warring, and implying a forum of violents incels (incels.co) weren't cranks. Which was bad. Also he kept threatening self-harm whenever I made my case either in support chat or here, which has been archived on external sites.   That's all I have to say, go on... If sysop revokation rights are not revoked from him then please permaban me, I have my own wikis I'll just move articles to.  Wonder how high this abusive behaviour goes in rationalwiki but it might be worth writing a media article about it Neiltyson1fan (talk) 18:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I felt the removal of rights was required to end the edit warring. I also felt that the topics spammed by the BoN were trolling and unproductive. I stand by my actions at this time. 18:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I have personally (not at the command of anyone else) decided to put Neiltyson1fan in the vandal bin for now. This limits him to edit once every 30 minutes. I do stand by this because Neiltyson1fan has a consistent habit of excessively editing comments after they have been posted (not just typos) and responding upwards to four or five times to the same comment. I doubt that this will be controversial, but he needs to learn the preview button as a general rule. 18:55, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I think we should make his sysoprevoke official honestly. For posterity more than anything, I want to point out neil has one of the biggest hallmarks of a long term problem user-obsessive seemingly personal stake in a specific subject where any compromise/backdown with disagreeing editors is a Intolerable Surrender to the Forces of Evil-Flandres (talk) 19:03, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Would @GrammarCommie like to clarify what these "threats of self-harm" were? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 18:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * In this edit I stated that I was going to cut myself rather than continue what I felt was a frustrating and pointless argument. I did not threaten anything, I simply stated my intentions. I only did this once. Though, to be fair to Neltsy the "cut my arm open" part is misleading. I actually made a shallow cut with the tip of a nail file, hardly cutting my arm open as I implied. 19:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that Neiltyson1fan has demonstrated some bad-faith editing by 1) edit warring over a reasonable AfD made by GC 2) threatening mass AfDs of articles if the AfD vote on Incels.co is allowed to proceed. On the talk page for Incels.co, Neiltyson1fan does not seem to understand socks on RW. Contrary to what Neiltyson1fan said, while socks are allowed on RW, voting with more than one account in a single vote is expressly prohibited. Bongolian (talk) 19:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * GC, please don't detail whatever you've done. As a victim of self-harm, I did not have to read that. 19:19, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Apologies, but I felt that it was required given the request for clarification. 19:23, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I see, but I don't think those details were really requested, it came pretty suddenly to me. 20:22, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't have anything against anyone here
 * pls permaban me
 * anyone can be friends w/ me and am putting aside wiki stuff &mdash; Unsigned, by: Neiltyson1fan / talk / contribs
 * This sort of behavior is not the kind of thing that we permaban people for. You can always LANCB, but as per precedent, there may still be a vote on punishment. Bongolian (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Note that now Neil has now added this line to their userpage: 'please permaban me if that guy who keeps threatening self-harm keeps sysop revokation rights'. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 20:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * That was added before that comment about friends, but yea anyone can be friends. Neiltyson1fan (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Think that rather than further drama one should just let me leave the wiki, don't wish to be seen as a martyr, just want to leave it Neiltyson1fan (talk) 20:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No one's stopping you from leaving. If you think you can make constructive contributions, you're more than welcome to stay. Bongolian (talk) 20:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sirius doesn't want me here, grammar doesn't, don't know about you, oxy is cool
 * And on wikis, people who lead the wiki are free to kick people off they don't like. And that's perfectly fine Neiltyson1fan (talk) 20:51, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Don’t we generally grant requests for a ban? “Editor request” isn’t a block reason as a joke. It just doesn’t come up often as everyone is a sysop.Christopher (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Sirius and grammar most likely wanna drag it out cuz I called Sirius a bad mod or something Neiltyson1fan (talk) 20:54, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * But yes I am requesting permaban Neiltyson1fan (talk) 20:54, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't mind you here. I am merely following procedure. What I did tell you was to stop trying to use the support chat as a backroom to hash out your issues with the wiki and instead talk about them in ATIM and to not try transparently shopping established editors for sympathy and support, because A. that the place isn't a mod backroom is in the rules and B. it has been pointed and said a lot of times by now by people on the wiki that we shouldn't use the support chat as a backroom (and for anyone currently not in there, we don't and I make a point of that.) 20:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * [EC] Request granted, now we can all move on, unless a mod disagrees with me. Christopher (talk) 20:59, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

So be it. I don't think there's an official policy on request to be permabanned. For future reference, sysops have the technical capacity to ban themselves. I think it is self-auto infinite block followed by self-removal of rights. Bongolian (talk) 21:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This has gone well beyond the initial discussion about the disputed article and the edit warring that accompanied said dispute. I'm irked by the fact that those seem to have been forgotten, but other than that I don't care. 21:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * There’s not much more to say, as the article has been deleted. Christopher (talk) 21:30, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't really think users should be permabanned on request unless they have a genuine addiction to wiki editing. If you don't want to edit here anymore, just don't edit here anymore. There's no need to make a big song and dance about it. However, I can't pretend to be feeling anything other than relief right now. Neiltyson1fan was ruder to me than any non-troll or non-vandal has ever been anywhere on the wikisphere and I'm glad to see the back of him. Spud (talk) 12:23, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

121.200.7.94 ban
Since we just had a ban war regarding this person, I think it would be better to bring it somewhere where we can discuss this. The reason I banned this person for pi months was because before I blocked them they had already been banned five times for making the same kinds of edits, and two of those bans were pi weeks long. I felt that there was no real point in going for a shorter block when those were proven to not be effective on this person. Anyway, I've said my side, now you can say yours. Plutocow (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This is officially no longer worth the effort for any of the involved parties-Hastur! (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Just leave it as it is. It’s ridiculous that this much concern has been given to 12 instances of generic spam/page blanking spread out across half a year. Christopher (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * If it was up to me, that person would've been banned for at least a whole year. I don't understand the arguments above either, it seems clear that person uses a proxy since that IP appears to be static. At least let me ban that IP for 3 months, seriously. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 20:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The historical argument for banning BoNs no more than 3 days is basically 1) that other, unrelated people could take up the BoNs themselves are usually rapidly reassigned by the IPs, and that 2) we don't want to prevent innocent people from making constructive edits on RW. Occasionally, point 1 is false and someone is able to stay on the same BoN for a very long time; this might warrant a longer than 3 days, but we usually only do 3 weeks for the bigger nuisances. Bongolian (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * #1 If the IP is static then you'd be wrong. That's precisely why Wikipedia bans IPs for over a year if they're found to be proxies. #2 See point 1 and thank you for acknowledging that someone might use an IP for longer than they should. Considering what I said earlier, I would still have banned this one for at least 1 year. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Open proxies should already be taken care of from a software perspective. That being said, some ISPs grant static IPv4s instead of dynamic ones. This seems to me more like a static IPv4 with the occasional bored troll. Revert, short term block and move on. 13:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Mr Poot
User:Mr Poot is probably a sock. I tried to ban him, but somebody removed it. Kevlarstar and his dog (Woof!) 19:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * How so? Are you saying that out of a gut feeling due to their username or is there an ounce of evidence that they are a sock? They have yet to commit any form of vandalism and Mikey can't be patient enough to earn the autoconfirmed status. I believe this editor should not be banned yet, unless they actually do something weird. MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 19:59, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * We don’t ban people because they’re probably a sock, we don’t even ban people because they’re definitely a sock. Christopher (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * For now they seem to just be a troll. Maybe they'll grow into a useful editor, but if it's Mikey, it's just a matter of time before he does something stupid and exposes his dumb ass. 22:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Yeah we don't do random bannings based on 'hunches' (unless you're Oxy and even then someone will still revert it because Oxy is a scumbag). AceSimple Maze 23:27, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Ace didn't wait a second to harass Oxy. Could another admin please step in and actually do something about this before it gets out of hand again? Shabi  DOO  00:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Before what gets out of hand? AceSimple Maze 00:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * The dig at Oxy was probably unneeded. Nevertheless, Ace's main point is valid. 01:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * A completely unprovoked insult to a user (who is under sanctions for making insults) is PROBABLY uneeded Commie? Where does the "probably" come from? Ace can make a valid point without throwing in two pointless insults in the same short sentence. What the fuck? Shabi  DOO  01:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Escalation works both ways-Hastur! (talk) 02:12, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's nice to see even with Gutless Raven gone Hastur still can't move beyond the "but you did it too" excuse. Back to the subject of the thread, I thought this was just some guy playing a joke rather than an outright troll-any lurker by now how probably picked up on the user renaming schtick.-Flandres (talk) 02:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I wasn't so much as saying "you did too" as I was saying "well if you're going to insist on making a thing out of it, then yeah, it's going to get out of hand." My apologies for being cryptic.  As fun as it is to pretend that ordinary conversations ought to be analyzed like in an english lit class I suppose I see why it's a bad idea for me to try to be subtle-Hastur! (talk)  02:25, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That was uncalled for, Ace. Bongolian (talk) 01:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Quite honestly I think that Oxy deserves all she gets. Go Ace! Scream!! (talk) 02:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * What exactly did I do now to deserve this comment? — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  07:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Hastur comment is nonsense and he and Ace's other cheerleaders are one of the reason good users have left this site. Calling out harassment and insults isn't escalating something, it's calling out unnecessary toxic bullshit. It's the same kind of thing Republicans say when they get called out for saying stupid offensive shit: that the people calling out the bullshit are the problems. Ace here was the problem. Knock it the fuck off Ace with provoking, harassing and insulting users for no reason. If you have a problem with Oxy take her to the coop. Shabi DOO  02:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Can I just make a plea to keep this thread on topic? If you need to hijack an unrelated thread just to whine about a user you don't like, you have some reflection to do.-Flandres (talk) 02:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

The consensus judgement in the coop was that Oxy receive a 3 week block, which has now expired. Hopefully, Oxy has had time to think about her past misbehavior. At this point, I think we should try to give Oxy the benefit of the doubt and not deliberately try to provoke her. Bongolian (talk) 02:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I recommend collapsing this whole section. Maybe it will never be heard of again. Decent people shouldn't look here.Ariel31459 (talk) 02:57, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * 05:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just my way of getting through the day. Lot hoopla over nothing. AceSimple Maze 03:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ace...consider taking out your problems in ways that don't involve pointlessly insulting users here. Like for instance: you can go to a park and scream as loud as possible, you could buy some boxing gloves and a punching bag or even better try breathing and relaxation exercises. If you truly must insult people then there are many reddit forums where being vicious to other users is encouraged and welcome. Shabi  DOO  09:01, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * - fuck you man. I’ll do as I please. AceSimple Maze 06:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ace, what did I do now to deserve this comment? You complain that I "stalk" you, which I don't, and yet you take every chance you can get to insult and backbite me. Whatever, I'm not gonna wrestle with the pigs. Have fun, and thanks Shabi for sticking up for me. Flandres and Bongolian too. Anyone I left out I sincerely apologize. — <font color="Purple">Oxyaena <font color="Red">Harass  07:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ace I don't think you are capable of self control (a problem you share with Oxy, at times to the same severity) and it seems unlikely you'll try to get that under control any time soon. Consider directing your most excessive toxic assholtry at other websites? Pretty please? Shabi  DOO  10:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oxy, they are probably referring to your many moments of lashing out at users with excessive insults and disproportionate responses to users (the stuff you did that got you blocked). It's no reason to trash you like they did here...but it should be obvious Oxy why it is they are saying those things. Shabi  DOO  10:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Just trying to get through my day. The Samaritans were engaged. AceSimple Maze 22:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

That Mr. Poot who turned up in the Saloon Bar is almost certainly not Michael Coombs but just some joker pretending to be him. For which reason, I'd block him for impersonation. I know Mikey hasn't actually called himself that but that's what we've called him often enough. So to come along and say, "I'm Mikemikev. Ask me anything", that's impersonation. And it would only encourage the real Mikey to come back, complain about libel and try to set the record straight. Spud (talk) 07:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Isn't the Mr Poot moniker handed out to every troll who comes to RW rather than just Michael? I have heard about a ravenpoot and a kenpoot, so even if it were true that this person did make this account with the intention to impersonate and troll mikey, then you would not be able to tell since there are more than 1 pooter. For the record, I would completely agree to ban someone if they were to make an account named after Michael's socks like "mikevmike2". MarioSuperstar77 (talk) 10:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ban this account? For what? Naming one's account after a moderator in-joke is not a bannable offense. And get real, when have we ever seen Mikeypoot go for even 2 hours without screeching about "LIBEL!" and "EVIL SCHIZOPHRENIC ANTIWHITES!" or doing his usual racist woo-pushing and then fantasizing about putting established editors "in ditch" when they revert him, let alone several days? (I'm not entirely sure how long though, as I've been busy af with homework and college visits.) -- Goatspeed. 07:27, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Pretty much this. Mikey boy is incapable of behaving like a normal person for the length of any non-superficial conversation. 08:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * My major concern was that people would ask him questions as if he were Mikemikev, that he'd answer as if he were Mikemikev and then the real Mikemikev would get even angrier than usual and keep coming back here screaming about libel. And knowing him, he'd probably blame it all on Oliver D. fucking Smith. I needn't have worried. That's obviously not going to happen now. And it's clear from the comments in recent days that it wouldn't have happened because many users here don't even associate the word "Poot" with Mikey, just with trolls in general. Well, I think you renamers will have to stop using the word "Poot" to avoid any confusion. Otherwise, no action required. Move along. There's nothing to see. Spud (talk) 12:20, 3 March 2021 (UTC)