Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
HighInBC (talk | contribs)
re chillum
Line 11: Line 11:


::While they clearly have a strong point of view on the matter(which I do not fully understand) I don't think they are involved unless they have acted in other than a purely administrative role in this matter. If this has happened I have not seen it. [[User talk:Chillum|<b style="color:Green">Chillum</b>]] 04:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
::While they clearly have a strong point of view on the matter(which I do not fully understand) I don't think they are involved unless they have acted in other than a purely administrative role in this matter. If this has happened I have not seen it. [[User talk:Chillum|<b style="color:Green">Chillum</b>]] 04:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
:::{{yo|Chillum}} SummerPhD is correct about their involvement. They have been involved with the content.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Coupe&diff=641026919&oldid=640908387][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fallacy_of_division&diff=641284659&oldid=641200969] [[User:OccultZone|'''<span style="color:DarkBlue;">Occult</span><span style="color:blue;">Zone</span>''']] <small>([[User talk:OccultZone#Top|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/OccultZone|Contributions]] • [[Special:Log/OccultZone|Log]])</small> 05:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:51, 2 March 2015

Formal restriction

* Note I have moved the next two comments from the project page to here. Chillum 23:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Two admins, Drmies and Yngvadottir, have unblocked with a WP:0RR restriction. In this context, editors are advised to carefully examine recent behavior, and block as appropriate if there is recidivism.

IP has breached the 0RR restriction, and is back to block-on-sight status.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kww (talk • contribs)

What the heck is this about? There is no requirement for there to be a formal restriction on an IP hopper to block them block evasion. Saying the user is blockable is based on sense, not a proclamation from a tzar. Regardless there is plenty of agreement on ANI that the user is disruptive. Chillum 23:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any admin who feels there is not a formal restriction on the editor can, of course, stuff beans up their nose and see what happens. Otherwise, we have a three month block for the editor to wait out or evade. Otherwise, we have a very real block. The editor knows where to turn to if they feel the block is a war against quality. The rest of us know where to go to make sure violations have consequences. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, it seems to me that Drmies and Yngvadottir are clearly WP:INVOLVED in this case. Corrent? - SummerPhD (talk) 03:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While they clearly have a strong point of view on the matter(which I do not fully understand) I don't think they are involved unless they have acted in other than a purely administrative role in this matter. If this has happened I have not seen it. Chillum 04:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Chillum: SummerPhD is correct about their involvement. They have been involved with the content.[1][2] OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 05:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply