I've learnt my lesson of not using socks again. I feared that if I came out clean I wouldn't get unblocked. However, I've never used my accounts for taking any advantage. No admin wants to let me back in. Six months is too long to go without editing and I don't have much in my life except editing Wikipedia. Sounds unrealistic, but it's the truth. Can you please consider lifting my block now that I've learnt my lesson? I promise not to sock or evade block again. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 18:18, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- Bbb23, this user has been harassing me cross-wiki and on IRC because I won’t unblock him, and I’ve had to ban him from the -unblock IRC channel multiple times for inappropriate behavior. I doubt you’re considering unblocking, but I’m more noting this for the record when he inevitably repeats his request in 6 months. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:24, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- TonyBallioni I'm not harassing you. My comments were outbursts because you don't care despite me being reformed. You didn't ban me because of my behaviour, but because I continually requested you to unblock but you didn't listen. Don't hold a grudge against me. But I can't edit for 6 months and I love to edit Wikipedia. Do you have any idea how devastating that is for me? If you won't unblock me, fine I won't "pester you".
- During my time on Wikipedia I've been civil and now avoid full fledged edit-war. I cooperate and will do so in future as well. I have been constructive and won't ever create another account again. I have lost my original account of DinoBambinoNFS, so I have no choice but to edit with MonsterHunter32. Hope you can let bygones be bygones and forgive. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 18:34, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Nor I wish to personally attack anyone. Please don't hold a grudge for my outbursts of frustration on my unblock requests being rejected despite me not socking anymore. I won't make such outburst comments anymore since it's not appropriate. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 19:06, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
I will wait six months as already adviced by Tony. I am trying to demonstrate I'm a constructive editor by letting go of all disputes on all Wiki projects and apologizing for comments out of frustration against Tony. Hopefully, my reformed behaviour is considered then. Thank you. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 19:51, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello, a while ago you participated in a feedback round about a proposal how accidental clicks on the rollback link could be avoided. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts and ideas!
Looking at the feedback and the rollback situation in different wikis, the development team decided how to approach this wish: As a default, most wikis won’t have a confirmation. But users who wish to have one, can enable it in their preferences, which will add a confirmation prompt to the rollback link on the diff page and on the list pages. The prompt won’t be a pop-up, but an inline prompt like for the thanks confirmation. You can read more about the planned solution and what influenced this decision on the project page. -- Best, Johanna Strodt (WMDE) (talk) 09:32, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Repetitive unblock requests
Hello Bbb23. You had revoked my talk page access saying I had made repetitve unblock requests. But per WP:NEVERUNBLOCK, there is no limit on number of unblock requests you can make: There is no limit to the number of unblock requests that a user may issue.
One may be blocked for disruptive use but I don’t think I was doing that and even then you had never specified if I was being disruptive. All you said was I was making repetitve requests which isn't disallowed by Wikipedia policies.
Hello Bbb, while I normally wouldn't pursue this but your revoking of my talk page further negatively affects my image. Talk page access should only be revoked if a user is disruptive. According to wiki policies you can make as many requests as you can. I didn't admit to block evasion just because I felt that it will not help and was scared will only further doom me. I
I was honest in UTRS and admitted block evasion but even that didn't help and I was banned for being repetitive there too even though I was honest the second time in UTRS, but I didn't expect them to ban me even after being honest
I like editing Wikipedia, but I'll seek an unblock later as told to me. However, I hope you can please cancel your revocation of ability to edit my talk page as it makes it look like I am being disruptive. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 05:50, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
It has been over a week now since I talked to you, but you don't even seem you have any responsibility to respond despite me proving how your TPA ban was made-up. You leave me no choice but to give you your only warning since you don't care if you're wrong. If you do this to any other user ever, I will report to have you warned and be de-sysoped if you continue harassing other users by frivolously banning them from their own TP. Since you're unlikely to unblock me or even feel any responsibility towards correcting your mistake, this is my last message to you until I make a request per the six-month offer. You can oppose it, but that won't discourage me from reporting your frivolous bans and harassment. MonsterHunter32 (talk) 06:31, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
This is a reminder to acknowledge and sign the new Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information. As you know, your volunteer role in Wikimedia projects gives you access to secure and sensitive information.
The new version includes one major change.
- There is a change regarding the way personal data may be released. Accordingly, functionaries must notify the Wikimedia Foundation at check-disclosurewikimedia.org before releasing data, in order to obtain a written approval for doing so. The Foundation will respond within 10 days. However, for emergencies, such as cases involving threats of violence, functionaries may release the personal data without such explicit permission, but they should notify the Foundation immediately following the disclosure. If they choose not to disclose the data, the request for disclosure should be forwarded to the Foundation's emergency email address (emergencywikimedia.org).
There are also some wording changes that were made to more closely align the language with evolving industry norms, best practices and laws. The most notable of these has been the change of the term "nonpublic information" to "nonpublic personal data". None of these changes are intended to make fundamental changes to the scope or practice of the policy but we know they could appear as such, hence wanted to flag them.
The aforementioned changes require users that have already signed the previous version of the policy to sign the new version as well.
We therefore ask that you to sign the updated version. Signing the agreement is tracked on Phabricator's Legalpad. An online guide is available to help you with signing the agreement: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information/How to sign. If you wish you can sign it directly at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/L37. The exact policy is located here: Access to nonpublic personal data policy. The text of the confidentiality agreement is located here: Confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information
If you have already received this message and signed the updated agreement, you need not sign it again. Once is sufficient. In this case, we ask that you respond to Samuel (WMF) letting him know when (date) and how (method/process of signing) you have signed it so that we can update our own records.
Note: please bear in mind that if you still haven’t signed the updated version of the Confidentiality Agreement by February 13, 2019 your rights will be removed.
Thank you for your understanding,
Samuel Guebo (User:Samuel (WMF)), Wikimedia Foundation
Posted by the MediaWiki message delivery - 15:15, 11 January 2019 (UTC)