Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Dan Murphy (talk | contribs)
Line 51: Line 51:


:::I note that he was still using '''sockpuppet IP User:86.18.223.124''' to canvas support at RS noticeboard on 1 January 2010. As this account was used to edit an article he was creating on his user page it's definetely Misconceptions2's sockpuppet.[[User:Cathar11|Cathar11]] ([[User talk:Cathar11|talk]]) 17:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
:::I note that he was still using '''sockpuppet IP User:86.18.223.124''' to canvas support at RS noticeboard on 1 January 2010. As this account was used to edit an article he was creating on his user page it's definetely Misconceptions2's sockpuppet.[[User:Cathar11|Cathar11]] ([[User talk:Cathar11|talk]]) 17:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

::I think [[User:188.221.108.172]] is another sockpuppet. Misconceptions2 is using it to override his block -- [[User:Razimantv|Raziman T V]] ([[User talk:Razimantv|talk]]) 18:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)


======<span style="font-size:150%"> CheckUser requests </span>======
======<span style="font-size:150%"> CheckUser requests </span>======

Revision as of 18:36, 2 January 2010

Misconceptions2

Misconceptions2 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

User:Misconception2

Report date January 2 2010, 15:16 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Bali ultimate

Misconception2 is involved in heated editing at a new article he just created Muhammad and assassinations (article since speedily deleted). In December he was blocked a week for sockpuppetting with User:Muhammadproject. Mirroryou1 shares this users problems with the english language and point of view, and has so far confined itself to reverting to his prefered version. Mirroryou1 was used earlier today to avoid 3rr. Admit-the-truth has already been blocked for peristend copyvios (the same persistent copyvio problems Misconceptions2 has had) but include it as a point of reference.

The underlying issue is that we have a very, very strong pov-battler on our hands who is much more interested in making some point or other about Islam (I'm not sure what it is exactly beyond "Islam is bad") and the extent of the disruption should at least be limited. Bali ultimate (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties   

I have been accused of sockpuppetry last time. I am only the roomate of Misconceptions and i live nextdoor to him.

i have a different IP and My ISP is: O2

I think the case is not sockpuppetry but meat puppetry this user is refering to--Mirroryou1 (talk) 15:26, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which is it, Mirroryou? Do you "live next door to him" or are you "his roomate." Ah, the webs we weave....Bali ultimate (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://s758.photobucket.com/albums/xx224/cloud-360/

here is some pictures of my internet--Mirroryou1 (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is up with you people. I have a different computer different ip, different isp than him. I got banned for meat puppetry before for 1 week and i wasnt allowed to defend myself!

now i am defending myself. i will upload some pictures to show you


--Misconceptions2 (talk) 16:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Misconceptions2 said nearly the same sentence that Mirroryou1 said above [1], but Mirroryou1 saying that doesn't make sense if he is not Misconceptions2, because he was not accused before, AFAIK. Misconceptions2 apparently said it about another account, not Mirroryou1, because he said "his account was banned". The time of registering the account, editing times and editing the same pages are very strong hints. Sole Soul (talk) 15:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The extraordinary thing is that Mirroryou1 is using the exact same argument as Misconceptions2 when he was previously banned on Dec-08-2009. The accounts involved then were Български360, 188.221.108.172, Admit-the-truth, 86.18.223.124, Muhammadproject. He was banned for 1 week for sock puppetry to enable edit warring. I think a longer ban is in order this time.Cathar11 (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, wow. You're right. The first comment by "mirroryou1" was supposed to be by the master account misconceptions2. Mirroryou hadn't ever been accused of anything, until today. Sort of makes checkuser unneccessary at this point. Hopefully, they'll get this down so we can 86 the lot shortly.Bali ultimate (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

this is so funny. the way your talking is like saying. "look at this stone its magical, then bali, the side kick comes along and says, it really is" just to sell it. i have been accused of sock puppetry by cathar11, in the article adminsrator notices/incidents. why dont u check it--Mirroryou1 (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So this what happenned:
      • Cathar11 in AN/I: Mirroryou1 is a sock of Misconceptions2
      • Misconceptions2 in AN/I: "i have been accused of this before" (he means in the previous SPI case a few weeks ago)
      • Mirroryou1 here: "I have been accused of sockpuppetry last time" (he means in the AN/I a few minutes ago) Sole Soul (talk) 18:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I note that he was still using sockpuppet IP User:86.18.223.124 to canvas support at RS noticeboard on 1 January 2010. As this account was used to edit an article he was creating on his user page it's definetely Misconceptions2's sockpuppet.Cathar11 (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think User:188.221.108.172 is another sockpuppet. Misconceptions2 is using it to override his block -- Raziman T V (talk) 18:36, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUser requests

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: D (3RR using socks )
Current status – Awaiting initial clerk review.    Requested by Bali ultimate (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC) [reply]


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Conclusions

Leave a Reply