User talk:Purplebackpack89

Welcome to Meta!

Hello Purplebackpack89!, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 05:24, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Simple

Meta has no ability to override my block of you on simplewiki. Jimbo, has not ability to override it either. You know this and you are just being a pain. Keep it up and you'll find yourself unable to edit meta as well. Kind regards, ... fr33kman 22:29, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Request for unblock

Unblock request declined This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators have reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason. Request reason: "I made a reasonable request and get a month block, even though I have done nothing on this project to justify a block of that magnitude. Since this is the first complaint anyone's had of me here, it shouldn't be longer than a couple days, if that at all. Furthermore, Fr33k blocked me for the very thing I said that I was going to drop, and even though I said I would drop it, used it as an excuse to extend a block on SimWP in addition to the patently unwarranted month-long block. Also, Fr33k took an unnecessary pot shot at me, claiming I need to "get a life". Please stop this!!!! Purplebackpack89 23:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)" Decline reason: "User has withdrawn unblock request after the block was shortened by Fr33kman (the admin who blocked him) to 1 day. Trijnstel 18:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)" Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.

block log gblock log blocklist stalktoy luxo's unblock remove gblock contribs: +/-

English | español | français | magyar | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | edit

I have shortened your block to 1 day here. fr33kman 08:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

And, in turn, I will drop the issue on Meta. I do believe the extension of my SimWP block from two weeks to indef was excessive, though, especially since you didn't mention it on AN, tag my talk page about it, or un-talkblock me to request an unblock Purplebackpack89 10:11, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Global bans policy discussion

At Requests for comment/Global bans, where you have commented in support of Option 2, a third option has recently been implemented. The first two options did not prove a way for respondents to indicate that they oppose global bans entirely, i.e., that it is not possible to write a meaningful global bans policy that would attract their support. Option 3 is intended to provide that opportunity, and to aid in distinguishing between people who oppose the proposed policy because it requires improvements and those who oppose the proposed policy because no policy permitting global bans should be adopted.

Because the third section was added late by a respondent, it is possible that some people who responded early in the RFC have commented at option 2, but would really prefer to support option 3, or support both. If so, you may voluntarily choose to move your original comment or to or strikethrough your original comment and add new comments. This is a courtesy notice of the change, and there is no requirement that you take any action. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, but I did want Option 2 (fix it) rather than Option 3 (oppose it) Purplebackpack89 17:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Feel free to do whatever you'd like. I notified everyone who posted a primary-level comment under Option 2, no matter what they said. In fact, I didn't even read most of the comments. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)