User talk:WikipediaWEhaveAproblem

Your welcome to RationalWiki is lukewarm at best, WikipediaWEhaveAproblem. This observation is due to the nature of your initial edits. Pull up a goat and try not to make trouble. We realize it is possible that you do not understand the nature of the site or our objectives. Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards to clarify things for you. If you're still interested in contributing, please see what our articles are intended to be.

Upon your next use of the term "libel" (or alleged proximity thereto), you will be blocked from editing this website. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 02:57, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

And yes, I will be sure to snag both bunchesanumbers too. PacWalker 03:01, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

@Aging Hippy - do you mean on platform mention only, or are you including off platform mentions, such as WWHP? WikipediaWEhaveAproblem (talk) 03:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Uh huh. I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire six shots or only five?" PacWalker 03:26, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

You don't want to get banned from RW. Then you'd have to write 70,000 words about it on your blog. Leuders (talk) 03:33, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

I've already been banned from Rational Wiki. My question is a legitimate one. I'm willing to respect forum rules, just want to know where those rules are extended to if at all. WikipediaWEhaveAproblem (talk) 03:46, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

FYI i just was informed of this message within the past 30 or so minutes. I'm not sure if I said it after you notified me of this. So I can only agree not to say it on this platform after I received the message and not before. WikipediaWEhaveAproblem (talk) 03:48, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

If you've already been banned from Rationalwiki, I have to ban this account as well. Thanks for your honesty. Peace. AgingHippie (talk) 03:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

His ban on that account expired; it was only for 1 year. So, technically not ban evasion. 32℉uzzy, 0℃atPotato (talk/stalk) 03:53, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

"Upon your next use of the term "libel" (or alleged proximity thereto), you will be blocked from editing this website. Peace." - AgingHippie, 0257 1 May 2015

"You mentioned what kind of statements I would consider libelous. THIS. [...] [proceeds to quote PacWalker]" - Rome Viharo, 0402 1 May 2015

It was five shots. B'bye now. PacWalker 06:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Sock puppeteering to evade a ban is just silly (and cause for yet another block)

Since this is an acknowledged sock puppet account of User:RomeViharo, I suggest to the puppeteer that he sticks to his existing, named account (that'll be preferable for ease of reference), or close that account and switches entirely to this one. It goes without saying that trying to sock puppeteer your way around a block is just grounds for a new (and probably longer) block. Make up your mind as to which account you prefer, stick to it, and take the consequences when you break the rules. A little less wahmbulancing would also be preferable, though not compulsory. ScepticWombat (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2015 (UTC)