User talk:67.190.61.6

Good luck too,

... some corn-pom fer ya'... ya'll com back now hear? -Edbrown05 07:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Jimmy Wales to Beijing Fascists: Wikipedia won't censor

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has refused to censor the content on the Chinese version of Wikipedia, resulting in its being blocked by the Chinese government. Google, Yahoo and others have folded to demands from Beijing's totalitarian bureaucrats, but Wikipedia has stood firm. Predictably, Beijing has come to Wikipedia to ask them for some kind of peace-treaty, because China can ill-afford to block critical information resources if it is to remain economically strong. If only Google and Yahoo's executives were as confident in the importance of their services as Wales is of Wikipedia. Wales said censorship was ' antithetical to the philosophy of Wikipedia. We occupy a position in the culture that I wish Google would take up, which is that we stand for the freedom for information, and for us to compromise I think would send very much the wrong signal: that there's no one left on the planet who's willing to say "You know what? We're not going to give up."' Wikipedia's entry on the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 includes the government's official claim that 200-300 died and the Chinese student associations and Chinese Red Cross's estimate of 2,000-3,000 deaths.

Wales said: 'I think it's an interesting question whether they're prepared to understand the difference between advocating one set of figures or another versus simply reporting on what the controversy is. I can understand that they would be upset - although of course I still don't think they have any moral right to ban anything - if we were pushing one set of figures in contrast to their objections, but if we are reporting both, to me that's exactly what an encyclopaedia should do and they should be comfortable with that.'

more info

Hahahahahahahaha.... 67.190.61.6 01:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Ban

Administrators may ban users at their discretion, if they feel that the said user is a non-contribuor or if the user's presence on Wikinews would be deterimental to the project. If you wish to appeal your ban, please use a legitimate acount (i.e User:Cowicide) to communicate with other users. You may also use {{unblock}} to have your block reviewed by another Administrator. If there is sufficient cause to unblock you, your ban will be lifted. Zeest^(Talk)_(Newpages) 11:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't use Cowicide to communicate with other users, it was permanently banned without a vote (and with dissent in the community) by Mrmiscellanious who is currently not an administrator or even an active contributer here. He was stripped of his admin status shortly after permabanning me without consensus because he was determined by the community (through a vote) to be unworthy of admin status.

Can you please show me where there was any kind of vote to permanently ban Cowicide? Also, once again, I can't use a "legitimate account" as you say because I cannot edit with my legitimate account because of Mrmiscellanious' illegitimate action action against me. BTW, this is the same IP address that I used before if you check in the History that will confirm it. I urge you to perform a checkuser on anyone that claims to be Cowicide including this IP address and you'll see that I did not ever commit any vandalism. It was sockpuppets trying to set me up and apparently they succeeded... but, once again... I don't see a vote on this anywhere and the one person who inflicted the permaban on Cowicide is not an admin or even a contributer at wikinews.

Anyway, you offer me nothing but a catch-22 here. How can I use my "legitimate" Cowicide account to communicate with others and appeal my ban, if I cannot use the Cowicide account to make any edits? 67.190.61.6 11:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Even blocked users can edit their talk-pages so you should be able to communicate as Cowicide so long as your talk is not protected. Community consensus is not always necessary for a ban, although the opinions of other editors may be taken into consideration. If you wish, I could start a thread about this on WN:ALERT or you could opt for Arbitration (in which case you will probably be temporarily unblocked) to have your concerns addressed. Zeest^(Talk)_(Newpages) 11:55, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, if you could start a thread that would be cool unless you think Arbitration would be better? I don't want to take up much of anyone's time, so whichever you think is more appropriate is fine by me... I just wish a checkuser would be performed.. I think the results may shock some here who thought I was the vandal when it was in fact an imposter trying to get me banned and/or help "steer" the community against Cowicide. While I admit I can be cantankerous at times, I'm not a vandal; it's beneath me. Thanks again for your response. 67.190.61.6 09:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

User:Cowicide has now been unblocked, so you may use that account. Best of luck, and stay out of trouble. Zeest^(Talk)_(Newpages) 11:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick! Thanks! : ) ... I'll stop using this IP thing. Trouble? I'm here for the girls... not trouble. ; ) 67.190.61.6 09:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)