User talk:Gale5050

From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is Gale5050's talk page, where you can send messages, comments, and pie to Gale5050.

Gale5050 (talk) 20:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)


Note. I will archive this page when sections become irrelevant so it doesn't get long. Here is the archive.--Gale 5050 Complaint Department 13:56, 4 September 2020 (UTC)



Notification: Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 7 days for deadnaming User:Cassie, in an edit summary.. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding {{unblock|your reason here}} below.  Cassandra  (talk) 22:27, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Appointment red.svg
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Gale5050 (block logactive blockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Fine, sorry for deadnaming Cassie, I won't do it again. Can my block please be lifted? --Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 22:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Sorry, but y'know I can't forgive you every time. Block length reduced by one hour, but that's as much as I will budge.  Cassandra  (talk) 22:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Appointment red.svg
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Gale5050 (block logactive blockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Last time wasn't deadnaming and was 2hr block. Week block not justified here. I'll be ok with 24hrs but no more. I'd also be ok with a permanent tban from your userpage with a month block if I violate it.Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 22:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

When you start an apology with "Fine, sorry..." it sounds like you actually aren't sorry. I'm tired of you bringing up irrelevant stuff, like a previous block that was much shorter, and I'm getting tired of you trying to declare what punishments of yours would be justified. I was expecting you to say that it was some sort of accident, but your decline requests barely even address what you've done. Combine that with your unfathomably long history of horrible behavior here, and just be grateful your block is not much, much longer. MrX blow me 22:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
In order to ensure neutrality, I will ask that a third party intervene for this unblock request.  Cassandra  (talk) 22:45, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Ok, but what if only non admins do.-Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 22:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
I suggest you use this week to reflect on your actions and learn to be a good member of the community. I'm not gonna overturn the ban. ~ HipponiasCUN Talk - Contribs - Articles  13:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Appointment red.svg
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Gale5050 (block logactive blockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

Ok, I thought long and hard about this (ever since my last one was declined), and I decided to contest the legitimacy of the block.

Uncyclopedia:Revision deletion never gives permission for him to blatantly misuse his tools like this. What you all are flawed about is that if a rule doesn't ban something, its ok. And that's why you are opposed to wikibueracracy like that. In addition, you are unwilling to deal with numerous copy-within-Uncyclopedia-copyvios (User:Simsilikesims/Interstate 15 is an example), which can get us terminated.

On WP, this would be grounds for a desysopping. The only reason that isn't happening is solely because Cassie is too popular. And our reliance on just a few admins. But I will continue to fight hard.

In short, my block is only exasterbating the numerous issues we already have, and when you get used to wikibueracracy, it actually gets more fun. (Hence why editing Wikipedia is so fun). This block should be taken as an embarrassment and allow us to fix our horrible system before it gets even worse. You cannot block someone for violating a rule that isn't explicit while at the same time doing it yourself. That's grounds for a desysopping.

And I will continue to fight for a positive change to this system. This block is bltantly unfair and this system really needs to change. This is probably why Berrely never edits anymore. or Shift674. Uncyclopedia is boring. Bueracracy (at least a little bit), adds spice to the mix.--Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 16:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

The reason why you were blocked mostly was not to do with deadnaming Cassie: it was because you refused to listen to or acknowledge other people many times. Your snarky and sarcastic apology also made matters a lot worse. As for your point on Wikibureaucracy, I tried editing Wikipedia and burnt out after 10 edits due to it, so while Wikipedia is obviously useful, every community needs its own type of system. If you have so many issues with Uncyc, why don't you go on Wikipedia and ask for a pardon, or join another wiki community? Cassie has been the most lenient and encouraging admin ever; she is the only reason you haven't been permabanned on this site. A week is extremely light for all the trouble you have caused since last year. ~ HipponiasCUN Talk - Contribs - Articles  16:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Per the above. The deadnaming was the last straw; you have been building up towards this point for months by this point.  Cassandra  (talk) 17:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey dickhead, you used her deadname. The fact you didn't even apologize for it (or did so snarkily) means that this ban is going to be upheld. Nobody is going to follow your attempts for bureacracy, and the only way I can see this not being the start of your downfall is that you finally realize that YOU fucked up. Not the system, not the admins, not the bans, YOU fucked up. Check yourself, Andrew, before you wreck yourself. WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 16:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
That doesn't address their admin abuse, though I shouldn't have done that, it still is a bad system.At this point my goal is taking down copyvios here--Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 16:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
BLOCK EXTENDED TO 1 MONTH for continued misgendering.  Cassandra  (talk) 16:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Cassie There was no misgendering.Saying "their" is actually not misgendering as I am not assuming your gender. Stop misusing your admin power, or there will be problems (through exterior sources).--Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 17:03, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Uncyclopedia:Revision deletion never gives permission for him to blatantly misuse his tools like this. JJPMaster 17:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Appointment red.svg
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Gale5050 (block logactive blockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

That was an accident. EVerything said above remains.--Gale5050 aka Andrew5 let's talk! See me on WP! Do not click before August 17:11, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Your previous request was already declined for the same reasons. JJPMaster 17:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi JJPMaster, forgive me for my ignorance on new site policies, but it seems to me that you lack the authority to block and unblock users, as you are not an administrator. Seemingly, this would mean that you lack the authority to grant or decline unblock requests. Is there something I am missing here? — Capitalis quadrata Y.SVG (talk) (contributions) 17:18:08 2021/05/07 UTC

Gale, above you said that there will be problems (through exterior sources), what exactly did you mean by this? — Capitalis quadrata Y.SVG (talk) (contributions) 17:12:55 2021/05/07 UTC

Whole hardheartedly support the month long block. Gale is completely oblivious to how disruptive and unpleasant he is. He has gotten away with absolute MONTHS of endless bullshit. His list of sanctions are ridiculously long. He has broken one of uncyclopedia's three most important rules: don't be a dick like...two dozen times in the last few months. That alone is worth a block. You've shown no remorse for your actions (fine sorry is not an appology). Telling an admin what kind of block you will accept is also more proof. As for your comments on bureaucracy...if literally everyone resists your proposals...then perhaps it is your proposal which is flawed. If this place is boring...then go find another website. ShabiDOO 17:16, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
re Gale5050: "Uncyclopedia:Revision deletion never gives permission for him to blatantly misuse his tools like this. " Look. You cannot try to lie your way out. You cannot just try to say that this is justified. Additionally, I probably am popular for a reason. Heck, I've gained flak before for NOT blocking you up until very recently.  Cassandra  (talk) 17:43, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Cassandra, when you say that you probably are popular for a reason, can you please explain what you mean by that? — Capitalis quadrata Y.SVG (talk) (contributions) 18:20:07 2021/05/07 UTC
She's popular because she is an outstanding admin/crat. She is level headed, did endless tasks others wouldn't do, is helpful, rather polite, has a fun/quirky sense of humour and is amicable and pleasant. ShabiDOO 18:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Also, regarding the deadnaming being "accidental," awfully strange to deadname someone twice after you just got blocked for a week for deadnaming, eh? Seems less "accidental" to me... WohMi, the Dueling King (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Holy. Shit. I mean holy fuuucking shiiiiiit. Really, Gale5050?? REEEEAAALLY?!? What is wrong with you? I feel like Stanley in that episode of The Office (US Version): "Every day you do something stupider than you did the day before. And I think, “there’s no possible way he can top that.” But what do you do?! You find a way, dammit, to top it! You are a professional idiot!" Gale5050, seriously, your behavior was already horrible. You are a very selfish and rude person. You act as though everyone owes you something and everyone should do everything your way. But now you have misgendered/deadnamed someone MULTIPLE TIMES! I'm, again, flabbergasted, just when I thought I couldn't be flabbergasted anymore by you. Consider this your final warning. No more disruption or dickish behavior of any kind will be tolerated. IF this block expires (there are multiple people who think an indef block may be appropriate, and I'm not even one of them), I will block you any time you dirupt Uncyc, make Uncyc less fun, refuse to listen, incorrectly tell people they've made mistakes, make false accuastions of any kind, change other people's comments/signatures, etc. No, these are not new sanctions, these are examples of disruptive behavior that anyone would be blocked for committing repeatedly. Please note that given your long history of being a dick, you most likely will not receive any short blocks for any infractions. Please also note that you are also always welcome to ask me on my talk page if you need clarification for anything. Being not a dick is not difficult, you should try it out, it's actually kinda fun. MrX blow me 21:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Socking

Oh how we’ve missed you!!!!! Nice try with User:Zocktersrat and your IP edit to Oregon. I’ll let Cassie decide if she wants to increase your block or not. MrX blow me 18:54, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

May all praise and glory be theirs. Willy on wheels (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2021 (UTC)