I added the material to the Wikiversity user page for Thekohser, and, to boot, restored the version at meta. There has clearly been a vendetta against Thekohser, it should be rare for the same names to pop up again and again in block logs. Adambro took it upon himself to decline an unblock request on WV. He could simply have left it. These are bad signs about local process. The same people who have been trying to remove Thekohser from the Public Speakers list at meta were involved in blanking the page and in blocking. Sucks.
Eventually, I predict, Kohs, you will be unblocked in places where you have not been seriously disruptive, and this is no judgment of your activity even there. I have not reviewed your block at Wikipedia, and have no opinion about it. But "Get Kohs!" seems to have become a bit of an obsession with some, and that will cause endless disruption, it should be nipped in the bud.
Many experienced editors will back off for a while, eventualists. Then you'll see an intervention, when the smoke has cleared, as John just did at Commons. But if you rant and rave, and especially if you sock, as you often do, it gets harder.
And note that when someone is very bright and sees a lot that others don't see, a sober commentary can look like ranting and raving!
The proper and effective grounds for an unblock request are to (1) promise not to continue any disruption that you could possibly, by some stretch even, admit to, and (2) show that your unblock will not cause serious harm, often by showing that you didn't cause harm.
Attacking the blocking administrator and the block as improper almost never works, because the blocking administrator could be a terrible biased monster, and yet right about you. Agreeing to reasonable restrictions is a commonly effective tactic in an unblock. Assuming that the community will look everything over and vindicate you is generally a foolish hope, most administrators simply don't have time, and too often there is nobody in the community with both the inclination and time to investigate. This is all part of standard Wikipedia dysfunction, I'm describing what works as it is, not what should work.
By the way, another often-effective tactic with a block is to negotiate with the blocking admin. It's probably where most unblock activity should start. It will create a record that, even if the blocking admin doesn't consent, will facilitate a neutral administrator in noticing that the block was improper or excessive and the blocking admin unreasonable or worse. You want the reviewing administrator to come up with that conclusion independently, it backfires if you push it. Let others defend you, basic wikipolitical principle. And if there aren't any others, start looking for the ropes tying the ship to the dock, it may be about to go down. On the other hand, there may be others, but it will, like lots of things on a wiki, take a lot of time. "Wiki" means 'quick"? Hah!
|