User talk:Triton Rocker

The Triton

<center"> I think that there is too much snooping and snitching on the Wikipedia

and it selfishly damages the goodwill of others -- ☠✠ Triton Rocker

If you wish to harass me, please do so below.

Harassment

Attack on another user and your civility parole

Triton Rocker I suggest that you strike you comment here regarding my editing immediately or face the possibility of another ban. Your attack on me is totally unjustified and goes against your civility restrictions. When will you ever learn? Bjmullan (talk) 17:10, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

ANI - Breach of civility parole

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User Triton Rocker. Thank you.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 year for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

(Note: this template replaces one that incorrectly described this as an arbitration enforcement block.)

Your account has been blocked for 1 year for violation of your British Isles civility parole (WP:GS/BI) in this edit. An editor who can't make three edits after coming off a one-month block without major incivility is not going to be able to contribute here. Looie496 (talk) 05:23, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Magog, can you excuse me, I am still working on my response.

Real world is calling me, I will respond later. Thank you. --Triton Rocker (talk) 05:38, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The complaint was actually correct -- this is a community sanction rather than an Arbitration sanction. I have altered the block settings accordingly. Rationale for block remains exactly as before. Looie496 (talk) 05:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

You are a brand new admin Looie. You made a serious mistake in the manner in which you handled this. If I was not so experienced, it might have been accepted unquestioningly.

What do you know of the background to this issue and the eits to which I referred.

I think I should be allowed to reply to ANI where this matter is being discussed and have a more experienced admin handle this case. Many of whom are already aware of the issues and individuals. Thank you. --Triton Rocker (talk) 05:48, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Not going to happen. It's pretty clear that you completely fail to understand how universal the rejection of your approach to editing is, at least among admins. Looie496 (talk) 06:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll have to get back to this later, Looie. You made a huge misjudgment in your initial decision making and it colored your actions, undercutting any credibility that I might have had in your judgement.

Please consider at the content angle just a little. The accuracy of the content is more important because without that credibility, the Wikipedia is nothing.

There is no point in users aspiring to others ideals of perfect manners if the encyclopedia itself is allowed to become riddled with inaccuracies in the meanwhile.

Thank you. --Triton Rocker (talk) 13:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

But by getting yourself blocked, you're not helping your accuracy cause. GoodDay (talk) 14:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Anyways, I find a Wikipedia-wide ban a tad harsh. A 1-year topic-ban from BI stuff, would be more productive. GoodDay (talk) 14:37, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Just go and do something usefull with your life Triton. You have nothing to gain from learning how to play this game, and take it from me, when the only answer you ever get back to a content point is, 'you must AGF!', then you are still a normal, cluefull person, who probably has more to lose by becoming a full on Wikipediot, than this topic would ever gain. It is infested with pure POV nonsense and POV pushing editors, who are the real SPAs here, which no ordinary Joe admin has even the first clue about how to deal with properly on their own, or even in counsel at ANI, not while Bjmullen is rattling the cage for action anyway, in one of the most blatant bits of gamery I've seen in a while. But take some heart in the fact that in the real world, these changes don't have much effect. That's just obvious whenever you see a true outsider comment on any one of those BISE 'discussions', even true green British hating Irish people. It's also why there will never ever be a community accepted guideline that follows some of ideas being served up there, even though they laughingly call that the task force's purpose of existence. As seen in Israel-Palestine and the Macedonia dispute, the enforcement situation won't get any more cluefull until it reaches arbcom. MickMacNee (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2010 (UTC)