[04:12:20] https://publictestwiki.com/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Naleksuh&diff=46165&oldid=46163&diffmode=source [04:12:20] [tell] BrandonWM: 2022-09-01 - 09:14:45UTC tell BrandonWM Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec [04:12:21] [url] User talk:Naleksuh: Difference between revisions - TestWiki | publictestwiki.com [04:12:27] Questionable diff? [04:12:39] No [04:13:09] oh nice RhinosF1 [04:13:23] um Naleksuh I was kind of asking everyone else [04:13:36] since they didn't make the diff [04:13:41] You tagged me [04:13:46] And this isn't the correct channel either [04:14:24] MHbot must've tagged you when explaining the diff [04:14:32] No, you tagged me directly [04:14:37] I have all the silly bots blocked [04:14:51] oh mb it was in the diff [04:14:57] User_talk:You [04:15:02] Either way, there's nothing questionable about it [04:15:13] All we have is me removing a post from my own talk page [04:15:20] yes about your actions [04:15:24] And? [04:15:29] a warning from another crat [04:15:50] WP:OWNTALK should apply but I thought there was an exception for active warnings [04:16:18] [discord] Wikipedia policies aren't Miraheze policies [04:16:29] @Agent It's not a policy on Wikipedia or Miraheze [04:16:41] I also wouldn't consider that message an "active warning" [04:17:05] Agent: I assume that supports my case even more then [04:17:16] No it doesn't [04:17:28] There's no exception for "active warnings" at all. There was a proposal to add this exception but that proposal failed [04:17:35] That message also isn't an "active warning" at all [04:17:43] the message shouldn't have been removed as it's in the community's best interests for the message to be seen [04:18:01] No, it isn't. Kiko is the only one who thinks it is OK for users to unblock themself. Four other users including a consul say it isn't [04:18:27] I won't revert as I have no intention of starting an edit war but for any other admin/crat... [04:18:28] [discord] Well, it's his own talk page. If he removed the message then he acknowledges he's seen it and either way, reverting a message will still cause an RC log action so interested parties can look at the diff [04:19:06] Also, you've removed things from your own talk page citing WP:OWNTALK four times [04:19:47] Naleksuh: While that may be the case I'd argue that all Reception did was propose a solution to users unblocking themselves. He never weighed in on our particular issue [04:20:18] yes, and? those warnings were defunct unless they weren't, then which they were appropriately reinstated [04:21:43] Actually now that I take another look at it all any of the users did was propose solutions to users unblocking themselves. none of them weighed in on my issue [04:22:11] which seems to me that you're the only one that's seen an issue. if another crat/consul had seen something, they surely would've brought it up [04:22:33] that's just my opinion though, i could very well be wrong [04:23:02] I didn't ask about your issue in my post [04:23:31] Should I? [04:23:44] "Since there isn't an active community at this time, if there are not any objections from anyone (other than BrandonWM themself) I will reinstate the block as an emergency measure." [04:23:50] I'd call that bringing it up [04:24:18] Yes, because you unblocked yourself [04:24:58] exactly [04:25:03] so you brought up my issue [04:25:16] I'm sorry, is you unblocking yourself supposed to be "your issue"? [04:25:23] I thought the issue was you violating your topic ban [04:26:04] You seem to think it's an issue [04:26:16] otherwise you wouldn't have brought it up [04:26:21] That didn't answer the question [04:26:45] i see no issue with it [04:27:01] other users haven't either, otherwise as I said they'd have brought it up [04:27:04] but they haven't [04:27:21] That also didn't answer the question [04:27:29] Which is "the issue"? The self-unblock or the tban violation? [04:27:41] that is your call, it seems, not mine [04:27:46] [discord] I thought I'd just mention that I don't really think it is appropriate to use `unblockself` if the block is a "serious" block (i.e. done for violating TestWiki policies) at all, if that's what's at issue here [04:27:46] i think neither is an issue [04:29:28] Reception123: Normally I wouldn't have, I only did because the blocking bureaucrat was engaged in a COI with the issue, having argued against it heavily on my talk page. In addition another bureaucrat had sided with me on the issue so I felt comfortable in removing it as I wasn't alone in believing while the block had good intentions, it was ultimately wrong. [04:29:48] Can you please post that onwiki? [04:30:10] why? [04:30:22] Discussion and transparency and all [04:30:23] [discord] You should've just asked another bureaucrat or consul though, not taken things into your own hands [04:30:30] Just confirm that you unblocked yourself and write that that's why you did [04:31:14] Naleksuh: I'll take that rationale at face value, sure, but I'm confused as to why I'd need to confirm I unblocked myself, the RC logs are clear [04:31:47] More so the reasons behind it. Also discussions like this should be onwiki in general [04:31:58] Reception123: Perhaps I should've, that probably would've been better I agree. [04:32:17] It's tedious to have a discussion like this on-wiki, what with all conflicting edits and such [04:32:29] There is no dead line [04:32:29] IRC is better and there are publicly kept logs by wm-bot [04:33:42] If you'd like me to link the logs in a message on-wiki I'm happy to [04:33:51] dead line? i'm confused [04:35:32] [discord] it's probably still best to have some on-wiki discussion since not everyone is reading this here [04:36:35] In what context? Full discussion or just the highlights of what needs to be read [04:37:40] [discord] I'd probably suggest explain why you chose to use unblockself instead of asking another crat/consul [04:38:48] happy to, posting shortly [04:44:56] done [18:39:22] [discord] No idea why I was pinged @brandonWM but this doesn't seem to need me