[15:32:46] [discord] @Stewards sadly it has come to the moment I need to report Paflidy for continously making their talk page only editable by Bureaucrats [15:33:20] [discord] Despite multiple warnings and removing the protection they have re-applied the protection level [15:42:13] [discord] looking [15:45:28] [discord] Revoke bureaucrat indefinitely. It can only be reinstated with the permission of a steward after a minimum of 1 month. [15:46:14] [discord] Enough is Enough! [15:46:30] [discord] thank you for your intervention ;) [16:50:14] [discord] I still believe they are Piccadilly [16:50:21] [discord] Even thought there is no evidence [16:56:48] [discord] 😂 [16:56:55] [discord] The ignorance is wild [17:16:24] [discord] @the_globe12 I don't get how it's obviously Piccadilly and it's being ignored [17:18:16] [discord] The edit pattern is giving a big hint [17:18:54] [discord] You think all LTAs are Piccadilly. There is no editing similarity imo [17:19:47] [discord] The username is similar.. [17:20:34] [discord] I feel like my accusation is valid [17:22:51] [discord] that is your only point [17:23:22] [discord] and the behavioral evidence and technical evidence is not there to make accusations like this [17:23:33] [discord] certainly not obvious [17:23:36] [discord] ^ @drummingman recently ran a CheckUser against Paflidy and that brough no results [17:24:58] [discord] Indeed [18:37:14] [discord] Hmm, Luna seems suspicious [18:37:46] [discord] they registered shortly after Paflidy lost their crat flag and the patterns of their first edits are a bit similar to Paflidy's [18:38:21] [discord] just so that others might err on the side of caution [18:39:48] [discord] just so that others might err on the side of caution, especially if they request the bureaucrat flag [19:00:25] [discord] Would be a good idea if @Stewards run a quick CheckUser [19:00:37] [discord] Worth potentially ruling this out [21:24:41] [discord] I can re-block if no one has objections [21:26:11] [discord] I will reblock Luna for misuse of rights if no one has objections [21:35:05] [discord] Looking [22:37:42] [discord] There is no technical evidence that this user was previously active on Test Wiki, so it seems that this is a new user. Admin has been removed and that is fine for now. [22:44:01] [discord] In the event of further abuse, the account may be blocked. [22:58:44] [discord] There is no technical evidence that this user was previously active on Test Wiki, so, it seems that this is a new user. Admin has been removed and that is fine for now. [22:58:57] [discord] There is no technical evidence that this user was previously active on Test Wiki, So, it seems that this is a new user. Admin has been removed and that is fine for now. [23:29:06] [discord] My thoughts exactly,