User talk:TheOrbFromDown

Welcome!

Hi TheOrbFromDown! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 05:43, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I actually do know my way around a wiki here and there! Just...not this one specifically haha. But it certainly appears like I might start getting more active and contributive around here after this. Certainly didn't expect it! TheOrbFromDown (talk) 05:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for being an account used to post in project space while evading scrutiny of your other account(s).

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Floquenbeam (talk) 23:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I really appreciate being blocked indefinitely without even a semblance of rhyme or reason. TheOrbFromDown (talk) 23:08, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

There is simply no way that you are the new account you claim to be. It is unethical to try to get someone else in trouble without your own behavior being scrutinized. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Did you seriously just indefinitely block me on a HUNCH? A *hunch.* TheOrbFromDown (talk) 23:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

To be fair, it's a really, really, really, really strong "hunch". --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't care if it's a "really, really, really, really strong" hunch! You can't pull stuff like that! You're accusing me of being someone...and you won't even clarify who that someone is! --TheOrbFromDown (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

TheOrbFromDown (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Floquenbeam blocked me because he thinks I'm someone else, without anything even resembling proof. Not even an accusation - the grounds are literally that vague. I'm...I'm not someone else... I'm not some other dude's account. If I knew who he thought I was, maybe then I could...I don't know, tell him that I'm not that person. Whoever that person is! I genuinely don't even know who he thinks I am. And to make matters even worse, Floquenbeam used this block as an excuse to let off another editor on a technicality on an ANI, dismissing the claim I made - along with five others - because, again, he thought I was someone else, while the user who had the ANI levied against him conducted himself throughout the entire process in the most belligerent and childish manner. I don't even know where to start with that, but I guess "flagrant abuse of administrative privilege" is a good spot.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Floquenbeam blocked me because he ''thinks'' I'm someone else, without anything even ''resembling'' proof. Not even an accusation - the grounds are ''literally'' that vague. I'm...I'm not someone else... I'm not some other dude's account. If I knew who he thought I was, maybe then I could...I don't know, ''tell him that I'm not that person.'' Whoever that person is! I genuinely don't even know who he thinks I am. And to make matters even worse, Floquenbeam used this block as an excuse to let off another editor on a ''technicality'' on an ANI, dismissing the claim I made - ''along with five others'' - because, again, he thought I was someone else, while the user who had the ANI levied against him conducted himself throughout the entire process in ''the'' most belligerent and childish manner. I don't even know where to start with that, but I guess "flagrant abuse of administrative privilege" is a good spot. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Floquenbeam blocked me because he ''thinks'' I'm someone else, without anything even ''resembling'' proof. Not even an accusation - the grounds are ''literally'' that vague. I'm...I'm not someone else... I'm not some other dude's account. If I knew who he thought I was, maybe then I could...I don't know, ''tell him that I'm not that person.'' Whoever that person is! I genuinely don't even know who he thinks I am. And to make matters even worse, Floquenbeam used this block as an excuse to let off another editor on a ''technicality'' on an ANI, dismissing the claim I made - ''along with five others'' - because, again, he thought I was someone else, while the user who had the ANI levied against him conducted himself throughout the entire process in ''the'' most belligerent and childish manner. I don't even know where to start with that, but I guess "flagrant abuse of administrative privilege" is a good spot. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Floquenbeam blocked me because he ''thinks'' I'm someone else, without anything even ''resembling'' proof. Not even an accusation - the grounds are ''literally'' that vague. I'm...I'm not someone else... I'm not some other dude's account. If I knew who he thought I was, maybe then I could...I don't know, ''tell him that I'm not that person.'' Whoever that person is! I genuinely don't even know who he thinks I am. And to make matters even worse, Floquenbeam used this block as an excuse to let off another editor on a ''technicality'' on an ANI, dismissing the claim I made - ''along with five others'' - because, again, he thought I was someone else, while the user who had the ANI levied against him conducted himself throughout the entire process in ''the'' most belligerent and childish manner. I don't even know where to start with that, but I guess "flagrant abuse of administrative privilege" is a good spot. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

If another admin looks at this, looks at the user's contribs, and thinks there's even a 1% chance this is an innocent new editor with no other account, feel free to unblock without consulting me first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:28, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Also, reviewing admin should see Special:Contributions/2603:9000:CC02:4E00:0:0:0:0/64, which I have also blocked. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

And looking at your Special:Contributions/Floquenbeam, I'm also noticing a very peculiar pattern: You do something purely out of impulse, or just act terribly to someone because you were just in that particular mood; then someone calls you out on it; then you offer up some sort of half-hearted apology or cop-out, or you just ignore them; and when the situation you're in actually gets reviewed, you act like the whole thing is somehow beneath you even though you yourself escalated it. Hell, you even put up a pre-emptive mea culpa with the whole "unblock without consulting me" because a part of you, by sheer history, knows you were in the wrong. So, also to the reviewing admin: He knows he's in the wrong, but did it anyway. I'm just the latest in a very, very, very, very, very long line of poor saps who ended up in this cobweb. TheOrbFromDown (talk) 23:58, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

"I instinctively side with the underdog, so I tend to react poorly when I see other people (particularly newbies) bullied or patronized. I'm not convinced that's a defect, but I'm trying to make more of an effort in not going immediately into attack mode." TheOrbFromDown (talk) 23:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

You are not the underdog. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

And you are not what one would call a straight shooter, or even a semi-decent judge of character:
"Floquenbeam acted in a way that overturned a decision intended to prevent harassment on the project, without reviewing the evidence for such a decision."
"A history of poor judgment calls."
"I see 3 unnecessary actions. It shows, to me, a serial lack of judgement."
"Creates a lot of unnecessary and distracting drama, and sometimes it's due to poor judgment."
" Drama king/queen. Even if we discount the unblocking of Fram, their resysop request to the BN deliberately made in defiance of T&S was a ludicrous move."
[And on, and on and on...] There's an entire forum thread dedicated to you, and the rather familiar stunts you pull.TheOrbFromDown (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

“They have a past of mistakes” does not mean everything one does is another mistake CreecregofLife (talk) 00:35, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Originally I had this removed because, frankly, you're not a part of this dispute even though it originated with you. This is between me and the admins. But I changed my mind. I want the admin who will review this to see exactly what's going on: This is the guy Floquenbeam let off on a technicality when he had complaints from five people lobbied against his conduct....because he thinks I'm some guy I'm not, has zero evidence of it, and impulsively acted on it. And what does the guy who got off on the technaclity do next? Parades right into my talk page, completely and utterly uncalled for, unnecessary, unwelcome, , frankly butting-in right under the block appeal. Haha, yeah. I think I do want the reviewing admin to see this in its entirety. TheOrbFromDown (talk) 01:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Zero evidence? Do you have evidence for your claim? Or do you think we can't see the IP saying "Consider your ass reported" was followed up by you posting the ANI report, where you specifically cited your motivation to be an encounter at Vincent D'Onofrio where the IP had their edits reverted? If you were separate people, why would you be motivated by that? Because you were directed to by a roommate? That's still not allowed. You admitted to it being a directed attack in the ANI report. I didn't get off on a "technicality", your accusations were frivolous in the first place CreecregofLife (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)