[01:50:26] DarkMatterMan4500, looking [02:01:15] Okay. [02:04:09] @dmehus Also, what are you still doing with the `jayuvandalwiki` investigation? [02:08:07] Also, Flaming Fist was indeed acting suspicious when he mentioned that certain blog post, which raises this question: How does he know what the blog post looked like? [02:19:56] yeah I'll try and conclude the other investigation today or tomorrow [02:30:48] Thanks, also, I sent you a message on IRC for you to look at. If I, for some reason am not active after this message is sent, launch me a Discord message on Direct messages, and we'll go from there. [02:32:28] will do [02:34:50] @dmehus Could you also look into Ilovepugs34. It is believed to be a sockpuppet of Ilovedogs34, another account that I suspected was a sock account, which was blocked earlier, but that account showing up only proved my point that they were evading a block. [02:35:01] When you have a minute or 2 to spare? [19:49:13] https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/Requests_for_Comment/End_the_horrible_treatment_of_proxies Something smells fishy about this RfC. This might be interesting, but given the circumstances, this is odd behavior. [19:49:13] [url] Requests for Comment/End the horrible treatment of proxies - Miraheze Meta | meta.miraheze.org [19:52:04] An abuse filter should be setup to prevent RfCs from being opened by unregistered users [19:52:53] Ah, why would unregistered users even open RFCs😂 [19:53:06] That's quite hilarious though [19:53:22] I think there's a strange occurrence going on here. [19:53:39] Seriously? [19:55:23] Yes. So far, about 3 IPs have made RfCs that are either ridiculous or something pretty stupid, or even odd for that matter [19:55:25] Just to troll I would say [19:56:09] I can see, lol [19:56:29] Obviously, I wonder such an RfC though [19:57:26] They were actually pleading for proxies to stop being blocked rather than a proper RfC [19:57:51] RfC: End the horrible treatment of locked accounts. Let people be free 🥺 [19:58:12] YES! Lmao [19:58:57] Locks, blocks and other censure are utterly inhumane treatments to a sovereign identity on the FREE wiki internet [19:59:07] ^^^ [19:59:49] But seriously, that RfC will definitely NEVER pass. [19:59:54] I'd rather exclaim this!!!!! [20:00:04] Of course not. [20:00:14] Of course not, unless an avalanche of IP editors also vote lol [20:00:30] wait for it.... [20:01:44] too late [20:01:53] Annnnndddd, it's deleted. [20:02:03] the evil receptionist has performed genocide against the free proxy peoples of thei nternet [20:02:35] heh, it's Gone too soon. [20:03:25] It wasn't going to pass anyway. [20:04:15] Oh yes, it was, but it's gone too soon😁 [20:04:36] Reception123: beat me [20:04:56] RhinosF1: heh. That proxy was already banned twice before, gave it its third just now [20:05:01] Ah [20:05:08] Did you global too [20:05:12] yes [20:05:13] I only saw local [20:05:38] I see [20:07:03] Reception123 seem to love globalization Or global warming :moonch: 😂 [20:07:33] But as a note to the above comments, IP votes are not accepted anyway and certainly not votes from proxies since that violates the NOPP [20:08:54] Why not just protect the RfC page so only logged-in users can create an RfC and not IPs? [20:11:00] Yeah, some sort of abuse filter like one that exists to prevent IP users from editing RfAs [20:11:28] Why would an AF be needed when we've got the protect option? [20:11:52] I think it should be up to a Steward as it's quite sensitive but I personally agree [20:12:22] Especially since creating an account is super easy so there's no reason for someone to argue that they aren't being allowed to create RfCs when they can easily create an account in less than a minute [20:12:25] I think the protection will do some justice. [20:12:49] and I have yet to see an IP-initiated RfC that wasn't trolling or similar [20:13:22] Doesn't protecting a page only protect one page and not prevent new subpages from being created? [20:13:44] afaik wouldn't cascading protection do that? [20:13:58] I'll admit I've never used it but that's been my understanding of how it works [20:14:10] Cascading might not be the best option though [20:14:27] It also protects all pages linked to that page [20:14:44] Yeah, I thought cascading protected pages linked inside the protected page [20:14:56] Users may find ways around, but that can be detected anyway. [20:15:36] Which is why I suggested an AF to prevent subpages of Request for Comments from being created by unregistered users [20:15:38] oh, it is a bit confusing [20:15:50] In that case an AF should be fine, just need a Steward to agree [20:16:17] Just be glad John might be regaining his Steward rights in the near future, (albeit if it succeeds though). [20:17:20] Then the Steward head count will be back up to 4 again. [20:21:36] https://discord.com/channels/407504499280707585/435711390544560128/904364296505524325 In case if some of you are unaware, John has shown some interest in becoming a Steward again. [20:21:36] [url] Discord | discord.com [20:26:04] It's going to need a fair bit more attention to actually get somewhere tbh [20:41:09] Yes, but let's make sure no one [w:WP:CANVASS] on there. [20:41:10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CANVASS [20:41:10] [wikipedia] WP:CANVASS | "In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it be done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus.Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, and is considered inappropriate. This is because it […]" [20:44:31] I mean, informing people in a public venue that a vote is going on isn't bad. Informing people who like you specifically and no one else on the other hand is canvassing. [20:44:50] A general broadcast is all well and good [20:45:08] Yeah, I personally consider canvassing when it's done in a non transparent way [20:45:20] Like if someone DMs someone and says "Vote in John's RfC!" [20:45:51] but if it's done publicly in a neutral manner to raise awareness there's no issues [20:47:37] Or if they say "START ADDING SUPPORT VOTES JUST TO BENEFIT MYSELF AND GET IT DONE QUICKLY!", that would be suspicious behavior. [20:48:16] heh well that's too obvious [20:48:33] I'd just say stick to public channels and be neutral [20:49:40] I know. I just started laughing because of the canvassing example, which you gotta admit is pretty funny. Canvassing in general are not appropriate, and it does remind of July. [20:53:11] Another example if there's canvassing, like if someone was dropping obvious hints that there's canvassing by saying "ALL HAIL X! WE WILL HAIL THEM AND SHOULD DEFINITELY BE GIVEN THIS ROLE!". [20:56:30] At that point I'd call it satire tbh [21:02:13] Yeah, clear satire lol [21:05:25] What happened in July? [21:06:33] Your RfS, I think [21:07:27] oh [21:08:12] Yeah, what about that? [21:08:35] Well asking people to vote for you via DM is the worst form of canvassing IMO [21:09:30] Indeed [21:09:46] Reception123: hell yeah [21:10:21] Yes, that one. [21:11:25] Yes, it was satire, but it would be silly if I saw a user writing "ALL HAIL X!" on an RfC. [21:11:45] Remind me to do that sometime >.> [21:12:01] You mean what I wrote just now? [21:12:43] mm [21:13:02] Very well then. [21:27:59] Harrassing people in DMs until they vote for you is a very bad form of canvassing [21:30:01] RhinosF1 yes it really is... [21:31:18] Then why did you do it [21:37:40] Lol, I really don't know, funny enough [21:38:35] That lesson has been part of my experience though 😁 [21:46:11] Harassment isn’t very funny, but glad you learned 😃 [21:48:36] Yeah, a long time ago though. [21:49:51] Nearly 4 months isn't a long time ago. [21:50:27] Still fairly recent [21:52:43] I think it would be best if we just drop the stick. [21:56:42] No one was holding the stick, tbh, unless you were. [22:12:57] Yes, it has gone on far enough. [23:38:37] @dmehus If it's possible, could you look into Ilovepugs34 and Ilovedogs34, based on my report above? https://discord.com/channels/407504499280707585/443926951292567562/905073653065076757 [23:38:38] [url] Discord | discord.com [23:39:57] That is, when you finish doing (you know what I'm talking about, so I won't really say much, other than that). [23:40:12] s/you/you're [23:40:12] darkmatterman450 meant to say: That is, when you're finish doing (you know what I'm talking about, so I won't really say much, other than that). [23:40:27] s/you're finish/you're finished [23:40:37] s/finish/finished [23:40:37] darkmatterman450 meant to say: That is, when you're finished doing (you know what I'm talking about, so I won't really say much, other than that).