1587:: I have to agree with Gabe on all points. The socking is obvious, and the penetration of Knowledge's editor infrastructure likely far deeper than we'll ever know. I think anyone who takes the time to look into it comes away with a good idea of who the sockmaster is, and I'm damn sorry I didn't pursue it further when the possibility was still open. I realize that there are technical limitations to the checkuser process, but there are many more artificially imposed limitations on it. I know very well that a CU can be run (and at least several of which I have personal knowledge
1611:, but everyone's afraid to do it. The floodgates are open, and no one cares to close them. While all the constructive editors being driven away go under, those who want to throw them a lifejacket are written off as paranoids with an irrational distrust of anyone with numbers next to their posts. In two weeks or two months or two years he'll be back. Maybe he'll use some racial epithets again and get another account blocked, but do you think that will stop him? SPI is a joke; Checkuser doubly so.
1357:
1666:
1118:
910:. I've worked on networks for 15 years (and with computers for 30) and I've still much to learn, but it isn't just a simple block and they go away. If it was, we wouldn't need SPI. Even here, the majority of investigations are behavior based, not CU. If they are using open proxies, the CU will be negative even though we know they are the same person. CU isn't as useful as you might think, it is only one tool.
582:
that requests for administrative action or blocking are raised and considered valid for CheckUser usage, and where CheckUser then determines that the user probably has engaged in such conduct, must expect that the protection of the project is given a higher priority than the protection of those who knowingly breach its policies on editorial conduct, if the two conflict or there is a problematic editing history."
1159:
1808:
It isn't a loophole, it is a technical limitation. We can't keep logs forever, and the very nature of the internet is such that anyone can bypass anything if they try hard enough. He has been blocked twice, if it happens again, ask Todd to review, I'm betting it will be an indef then. As much as I
1596:
The fact that so many trolls are able to come back again and again is unavoidable, but it could be lessened very easily. It only takes a few seconds to acquire a new IP address, but creating a new email address to register an account takes significantly longer. CU requests are routinely denied simply
715:
There has been no finding to this effect. There has been a move based on a gut feeling by a clerk, but no final determination, which is why the investigation is still open. I'm confused as to why this is being bludgeoned here. It hasn't been open very long, two days. Some cases are open a week or
602:
The level of disruption here is far below the threshold to have CU connect any registered account to the IP. This is more than a quote in the CU policy, this is about the privacy policy of the entire project, which clearly says we won't publicly disclose those kinds of relationships, period. Simply
581:
says that "it is hard to avoid and "Knowledge norms are not a suicide pact" โ a user who is disruptive and needs to be addressed as such may have to accept that the price of disruption is that their IP becomes linked to their account." and that "Users who engage in problematic conduct to the point
456:
this was declined? This IP user has been causing disruption and harassing me for over a month now, and this continual passing of the buck to avoid solving this issue is getting frustrating. IMO, the actions of this IP user are starting to cross legal boundries and are entering into fraud and legal
418:
I've added the formal CUrequest tag above, and I won't respond to the request myself (because I would be forced to decline), although I doubt it will be endorsed simply because CU generally doesn't connect IPs and names, to prove innocence or guilt. Technically, it was already declined, but again,
1796:
Then it would seem that using IPs and/or waiting 90 days after vanishing is all one would ever need to do to get away with almost anything here, that's a massive loophole that contributes to good-faith editor loss IMO. Can you provide any suggestions for a registered user in good standing who has
1597:
because an IP address happens to be involved. We've created a privileged class in the name of "privacy", because heaven forbid someone with checkuser authority know roughly what part of the world a troll originates from (never mind the fact that the majority of them are using proxies anyway), and
905:
I don't. I've never indef'ed an IP and very few admins will. I consider it a mistake under 99% of circumstances. IPs change, even static ones. Mine do every couple of years for a variety of reasons. And we don't block proxy servers, just open proxies, which is a very different thing. CU isn't
692:
I'm saying that the stated decision of this SPI is that this is
Radiopathy's sock. At this point we have no confirmation that this is his sock. In addition, I don't believe a similarity between editing habits has been presented. If we don't have any proof, I find it baseless to archive this as
457:
harassment. Why is no one willing to get to the bottom of this IP user who is most likely a sock and almost certainly a troll? Also, "we don't run a checkuser to prove innocence" does not make any logical sense to me. Why can't CU be used to clear an accused user's name? ~
893:
So, it sounds like you are telling me that IPs are virtually immune to both CU and indef blocks. Why? We indef IP addys known to be proxy servers with no rationale other than they are proxy servers, which do have some perfectly legitimate uses. ~
1641:
I know it. It's out of the community's control, at least as far as direct action is concerned. The vast majority of you CU guys do a great job with the situation you've been given. I just wish you had a more reasonable set of rules to play by.
541:
I don't entirely disagree with the logic, it makes sense, but the practical application of it is that IPs are immune from CU, so that still seems like a loophole for trolls and socks, even if the logic behind it is not unreasonable. ~
1601:
would be sure to implode if we got the name of their ISP! This isn't Rschen's fault, of course, so I hope no one feels picked upon. The point I am making is that this problem is systemic; this is not an isolated
852:
Also, if the IP user has a static IP then turning off his modem will not result in new IP addy. Maybe they went to a local library, or a coffee shop with WiFi after their home IP was indeffed by Coren. ~
508:
It isn't a loophole, it is a private policy that recognizes the differences between an IP and a registered user. For instance, I have no idea where you live, but I know the IP is just north of
Toronto
1170:
I've also adjusted said IP block; it first appeared to have been statically allocated, though that's no longer clear since our IP troll has hopped to a new one in a slightly different range. โ
1128:. While I agree that blocks can be wrong, admins should have enough evidence to make a block before they block it, not block it then get a CU (even though it wouldn't happen in this case). --
1505:
7 months of similar harrassment, stalking and disruption. I have dozens of diffs if needed, but I can say that at least two admins have expressed concern that Plant's
Strider is a sock.
330:
497:
Perhaps this is precisely why the IP user in question will not register an account. This is a silly loophole that is basically saying that if you edit as an IP you are immune to CU. ~
1041:
1015:
766:
We don't need CU to block a troll or someone harassing. The vast majority of blocks for that have nothing to do with SPI. Actually, most sock blocks don't happen here at SPI.
716:
two. I'm not clerking here anyway, just trying to answer questions, but it is getting a bit much. You both know how this works, but taking it a bit personal. Give it time.
1704:
There are no other named accounts to CU with. Connecting accounts to IP addresses is a violation of the privacy policy, and cannot be done except in cases of extreme abuse. --
864:
Then that was Coren's mistake. There are very few instances where we would indef an IP, and only when we know the end point (corporation), and even that is very, very rare.
21:
632:
Then can we make a decision to remove the stated connection between this IP and radiopathy? If we state that this is his sock, we are still connecting him to this IP.
1575:
1336:
287:
1418:
1067:
1040:
Adding that the case name is for
Radiopathy but that was never clearly established that it was this user. Nonetheless, this is the same sock as comparable to
985:. What exactly are we doing then? Are we turning our heads the other way and ignoring the sockpuppetry or are we accusing Radiopathy based on no evidence?
652:
Not quite. You have inferred or deduced a connection, unless the editor himself has confirmed it from both his IP and account. Only a CheckUser can actually
975:
Let me make sure I'm entirely clear on this. Right now we have "determined" a sockpuppet but blocked nobody (except the obvious puppet). In addition, the
65:
1591:
been run) to establish a connection between anonymous and registered users. I don't think I'm blowing open any "cabal" secrets by stating that openly.
384:
I've got to agree. I'll expand on this and say that although says that self requests for checkuser aren't approved on en.wiki to prove innocense,
1721:
That being said, admins are still free to examine behavior to make a determination - CU is just one of the tools that we have available to us. --
468:
CheckUser doesn't run a checkuser on IPs under almost all circumstances, due to privacy policy concerns. This is standard operating procedure.
1411:
1828:
929:
883:
827:
785:
735:
622:
531:
487:
438:
1481:
1179:
Since there is no apparent named master, I've renamed the case to the previous IP, and with nothing else to do, I'm closing it as well. โโ
128:
239:
169:
58:
17:
1821:
1229:
922:
876:
820:
778:
728:
615:
524:
480:
431:
1757:
GabeMc, that depends on how long ago the potential master last edited. If their edits are stale, CU won't be able to see anything. โโ
1018:. Compare his IPs. I'll wait for confirmation (admin 2nd opinion) before we move to correct master. No checkuser will be necessary.
1457:
1363:
The sole edit of the IP seems unrelated to anything posted by the other trolls. Closing, unless you can provide further evidence.
906:
designed for IPs anyway, we already know their IP address, the main piece of information that a CU pulls up, it is to connect two
1729:
1712:
1684:
1632:
1438:
104:
671:
250:
This IP seems to be a sockpuppet of someone. Can a checkuser try to figure this out? Note that he has acted as GabeMC in
1833:
1803:
1791:
1777:
1766:
1744:
1733:
1716:
1699:
1688:
1646:
1636:
1615:
1559:
1372:
1321:
1188:
1174:
1139:
1105:
1083:
1057:
1031:
1000:
934:
900:
888:
859:
847:
832:
801:
790:
761:
740:
708:
680:
665:
647:
627:
597:
568:
548:
536:
503:
492:
463:
443:
403:
379:
348:
324:
272:
512:. Linking registered names to IPs would be a form of outing them, which might have real world negative consequences.
200:
85:
1399:
1260:
693:
radiopathy's sock and we cannot block him either. We should close this as a request with an undetermined master.
1529:
20 January 2013, 2 hours and 20 minutes after I edited the page for the very first time, PS also editโs the page
353:
This person had the audacity to drag my name into this again, and he had better fucking well prove that it's me.
1094:
I'm sorry but
Checkusers will not run a check to prove innocence, and I see no other grounds to run a check. --
1368:
751:
this IP user's master is. So the logic here is apparently that any given IP can troll and harass and disrupt
1078:
1052:
1026:
157:
46:
1816:
1217:
917:
871:
815:
773:
723:
610:
519:
475:
426:
255:
808:
We don't indef IPs Gabe. The guy has probably already turned his modem off and on and has a new IP.
1726:
1709:
1681:
1629:
993:
701:
640:
590:
561:
396:
376:
341:
321:
265:
181:
1510:"it's not that I once had a look at Gabe's contributions and started to edit the pages accordingly"
1364:
1241:
1134:
1125:
1100:
981:
evidence that this is a sockpuppet of
Radiopathy is that it is a similar IP address to another SPI
578:
1547:
1489:
1299:
1073:
1047:
1021:
687:
661:
1620:
The issue is that the privacy policy forbids CUs from linking the two. You may wish to read the
1810:
1621:
911:
865:
809:
767:
717:
604:
513:
469:
420:
1723:
1706:
1678:
1626:
1356:
986:
694:
633:
583:
554:
389:
355:
334:
300:
258:
1499:
1309:
553:
In addition, under that thought process, editors who sock with IP addresses are immune.
1787:
1762:
1665:
1643:
1612:
1184:
1129:
1117:
1095:
1693:
That logic would seem to imply that any troll who begins as an IP is immune from CU.
795:
Right, I agree and I suggest that we can safely indef this IP now as a sock troll. ~
657:
1070:
of the other IP that was indeffed by Coren. The block time likely needs increased.
187:
1798:
1772:
1739:
1694:
1554:
1316:
1247:
1144:
I put "checked" above though that's not strictly what I did. It is clear that:
895:
854:
842:
796:
756:
675:
543:
510:
498:
458:
1158:
1171:
219:
1783:
1758:
1279:
1180:
838:
603:
put, it isn't going to happen here, and laboring it won't change that fact.
193:
1394:
1253:
755:
it becomes appropriate for CU, but who decides when that time has come? ~
329:@DeltaQuad, That's ridiculous. Non-checkuser blocks can be wrong. See
1738:
Will they CU if I name a potential master who is also a vanished user?
152:
41:
1574:
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See
1335:
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See
1212:
286:
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See
1537:
1607:
So, yes, I suppose there's nothing to be done. Or, rather, there
1124:
I can not comment publicly if any accounts and IPs are related
298:
I'm requesting checkuser; this bullshit has gone too far now.
1809:
wish SPI could cure all the ills that plague us, it can't.
1165:
to both
Radiopathy or Andreasegde. At all. Not even close.
1150:
This is the same troll on the IP I had blocked previously.
837:"We don't indef IPs Gabe", does Coren know this rule? See
331:
Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations/Dannyboy1209/Archive
1551:
1541:
1530:
1523:
1516:
1509:
1475:
1468:
1464:
1451:
1444:
1431:
1425:
1405:
1290:
1286:
1273:
1266:
1235:
1223:
747:
I don't think there is any hard evidence whatsoever of
251:
230:
226:
213:
206:
175:
163:
122:
115:
111:
98:
91:
78:
72:
52:
1797:
been continuously harrassed for more than 7 months?
1126:
as I am bound by the
Checkuser and Privacy Policies
1658:Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
1349:Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
1008:Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
419:will let others look at it since this is unusual.
1542:PS made their very first edit ever to the page
1782:Sorry, but yes, that would count as stale. โโ
1515:19 January 2013, erroneously questioning and
1066:My block was only for 48 hours but I see the
8:
1546:21 January 2013, 3 minutes after my edit to
452:I'm curious, is there any particular reason
254:and has mentioned Coren, Jimbo, and GabeMC
1624:, which is entirely out of our control. --
1552:PS makes their very first edit to the page
1522:19 January 2013, 2nd edit of the day,
7:
577:But that statement doesn't exist.
18:Knowledge:Sockpuppet investigations
1676:connect accounts to IP addresses.
1540:, one minute after my edit there,
28:
1576:Defending yourself against claims
1337:Defending yourself against claims
288:Defending yourself against claims
1664:
1526:that PS had never edited before.
1524:following me to yet another page
1355:
1157:
1116:
656:a connection between the two.
1:
1519:as his first edit of the day.
1315:Same cable company, same MO.
1122:Check declined by a checkuser
1834:12:27, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1804:01:52, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1792:01:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1778:01:42, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1767:01:39, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1745:01:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1734:01:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1717:01:32, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1700:01:28, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1689:01:26, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1647:02:42, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1637:02:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1616:02:30, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1560:01:25, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
1373:18:06, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1322:00:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
1189:12:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
1175:03:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
1140:00:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
1001:00:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
935:12:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
901:01:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
889:01:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
860:01:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
848:01:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
833:01:32, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
802:01:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
791:01:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
762:01:25, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
741:01:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
709:01:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
681:01:19, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
666:01:15, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
648:01:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
628:01:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
598:01:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
569:01:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
549:00:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
537:00:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
504:00:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
493:00:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
464:00:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
1859:
1500:Editor interaction utility
1494:Auto-generated every hour.
1310:Editor interaction utility
1304:Auto-generated every hour.
1106:01:06, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
1084:18:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
1058:18:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
1032:18:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
444:01:25, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
404:01:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
380:01:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
349:01:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
325:00:49, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
273:17:52, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
244:Auto-generated every hour.
1531:for the very "first" time
1508:I quote Plant's Strider:
388:am requesting checkuser.
1771:Is 90+ days too stale?
1567:Comments by other users
1328:Comments by other users
279:Comments by other users
1387:Suspected sockpuppets
1205:Suspected sockpuppets
145:Suspected sockpuppets
1585:Comment by Evanh2008
1536:21 January 2013: At
1014:Got it. The case is
1517:confronting my work
1490:User compare report
1300:User compare report
1280:cross-wiki contribs
1042:this July 12 report
579:Knowledge:Checkuser
240:User compare report
220:cross-wiki contribs
1622:wmf:Privacy policy
983:that was withdrawn
1832:
1824:
1819:
1580:
1496:
1341:
1306:
933:
925:
920:
887:
879:
874:
831:
823:
818:
789:
781:
776:
739:
731:
726:
691:
626:
618:
613:
535:
527:
522:
491:
483:
478:
442:
434:
429:
292:
246:
1850:
1826:
1822:
1817:
1801:
1775:
1742:
1697:
1668:
1659:
1572:
1568:
1557:
1492:
1486:
1484:
1447:
1421:
1419:deleted contribs
1397:
1359:
1350:
1333:
1329:
1319:
1302:
1296:
1294:
1269:
1215:
1161:
1137:
1132:
1120:
1103:
1098:
1081:
1076:
1055:
1050:
1029:
1024:
1009:
927:
923:
918:
898:
881:
877:
872:
857:
845:
825:
821:
816:
799:
783:
779:
774:
759:
733:
729:
724:
685:
678:
620:
616:
611:
546:
529:
525:
520:
501:
485:
481:
476:
461:
436:
432:
427:
373:
370:
367:
364:
361:
358:
318:
315:
312:
309:
306:
303:
284:
280:
242:
236:
234:
209:
155:
133:
131:
94:
68:
66:deleted contribs
44:
1858:
1857:
1853:
1852:
1851:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1799:
1773:
1740:
1695:
1661:
1657:
1570:
1566:
1555:
1460:
1434:
1414:
1395:Plant's Strider
1393:
1392:
1384:
1382:
1381:26 January 2013
1352:
1348:
1331:
1327:
1317:
1282:
1256:
1211:
1210:
1202:
1200:
1199:07 January 2013
1135:
1130:
1101:
1096:
1079:
1074:
1053:
1048:
1027:
1022:
1011:
1007:
896:
855:
843:
797:
757:
676:
674:or relevant? ~
544:
499:
459:
371:
368:
365:
362:
359:
356:
316:
313:
310:
307:
304:
301:
282:
278:
222:
196:
151:
150:
142:
140:
107:
81:
61:
40:
39:
36:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1856:
1854:
1846:
1845:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1841:
1840:
1839:
1838:
1837:
1836:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1752:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1748:
1747:
1670:Clerk declined
1660:
1655:
1654:
1653:
1652:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1604:
1603:
1599:reality itself
1593:
1592:
1569:
1564:
1563:
1562:
1544:
1534:
1527:
1520:
1503:
1502:
1497:
1487:
1389:
1388:
1383:
1380:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1365:Reaper Eternal
1351:
1346:
1344:
1330:
1325:
1313:
1312:
1307:
1297:
1207:
1206:
1201:
1198:
1196:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1151:
1142:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1087:
1086:
1071:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1045:
1035:
1034:
1019:
1010:
1005:
1004:
1003:
972:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
952:
951:
950:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
850:
745:
744:
743:
683:
575:
574:
573:
572:
571:
447:
446:
415:
414:
413:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
406:
281:
276:
248:
247:
237:
147:
146:
141:
139:08 August 2012
138:
136:
135:
134:
35:
32:
30:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1855:
1835:
1831:
1830:
1825:
1820:
1814:
1813:
1807:
1806:
1805:
1802:
1795:
1794:
1793:
1789:
1785:
1781:
1780:
1779:
1776:
1770:
1769:
1768:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1746:
1743:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1732:
1731:
1728:
1725:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1715:
1714:
1711:
1708:
1703:
1702:
1701:
1698:
1692:
1691:
1690:
1687:
1686:
1683:
1680:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1662:
1656:
1648:
1645:
1640:
1639:
1638:
1635:
1634:
1631:
1628:
1623:
1619:
1618:
1617:
1614:
1610:
1606:
1605:
1600:
1595:
1594:
1590:
1586:
1583:
1582:
1581:
1579:
1577:
1565:
1561:
1558:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1532:
1528:
1525:
1521:
1518:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1506:
1501:
1498:
1495:
1491:
1488:
1483:
1480:
1477:
1474:
1470:
1466:
1463:
1459:
1456:
1453:
1450:
1446:
1443:
1440:
1437:
1433:
1430:
1427:
1424:
1420:
1417:
1413:
1410:
1407:
1404:
1401:
1396:
1391:
1390:
1386:
1385:
1379:
1374:
1370:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1353:
1347:
1345:
1342:
1340:
1338:
1326:
1324:
1323:
1320:
1311:
1308:
1305:
1301:
1298:
1292:
1288:
1285:
1281:
1278:
1275:
1272:
1268:
1265:
1262:
1259:
1255:
1252:
1249:
1246:
1243:
1240:
1237:
1234:
1231:
1228:
1225:
1222:
1219:
1214:
1209:
1208:
1204:
1203:
1197:
1190:
1186:
1182:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1173:
1169:
1164:
1160:
1155:
1152:
1149:
1146:
1145:
1143:
1141:
1138:
1133:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1114:
1107:
1104:
1099:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1088:
1085:
1082:
1077:
1075:Berean Hunter
1069:
1065:
1064:
1059:
1056:
1051:
1049:Berean Hunter
1043:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1033:
1030:
1025:
1023:Berean Hunter
1017:
1013:
1012:
1006:
1002:
999:
998:
997:
992:
991:
990:
984:
980:
979:
974:
973:
936:
932:
931:
926:
921:
915:
914:
909:
904:
903:
902:
899:
892:
891:
890:
886:
885:
880:
875:
869:
868:
863:
862:
861:
858:
851:
849:
846:
840:
836:
835:
834:
830:
829:
824:
819:
813:
812:
807:
806:
805:
804:
803:
800:
794:
793:
792:
788:
787:
782:
777:
771:
770:
765:
764:
763:
760:
754:
750:
746:
742:
738:
737:
732:
727:
721:
720:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
707:
706:
705:
700:
699:
698:
689:
688:edit conflict
684:
682:
679:
673:
669:
668:
667:
663:
659:
655:
651:
650:
649:
646:
645:
644:
639:
638:
637:
631:
630:
629:
625:
624:
619:
614:
608:
607:
601:
600:
599:
596:
595:
594:
589:
588:
587:
580:
576:
570:
567:
566:
565:
560:
559:
558:
552:
551:
550:
547:
540:
539:
538:
534:
533:
528:
523:
517:
516:
511:
507:
506:
505:
502:
496:
495:
494:
490:
489:
484:
479:
473:
472:
467:
466:
465:
462:
455:
451:
450:
449:
448:
445:
441:
440:
435:
430:
424:
423:
417:
416:
405:
402:
401:
400:
395:
394:
393:
387:
383:
382:
381:
378:
375:
374:
352:
351:
350:
347:
346:
345:
340:
339:
338:
332:
328:
327:
326:
323:
320:
319:
297:
296:
295:
294:
293:
291:
289:
277:
275:
274:
271:
270:
269:
264:
263:
262:
257:
253:
245:
241:
238:
232:
228:
225:
221:
218:
215:
212:
208:
205:
202:
199:
195:
192:
189:
186:
183:
180:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
154:
153:99.251.150.62
149:
148:
144:
143:
137:
130:
127:
124:
121:
117:
113:
110:
106:
103:
100:
97:
93:
90:
87:
84:
80:
77:
74:
71:
67:
64:
60:
57:
54:
51:
48:
43:
42:99.251.125.65
38:
37:
34:99.251.125.65
33:
31:
23:
22:99.251.125.65
19:
1827:
1812:Dennis Brown
1811:
1722:
1705:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1625:
1608:
1598:
1588:
1584:
1573:
1571:
1507:
1504:
1493:
1478:
1472:
1461:
1454:
1448:
1441:
1435:
1428:
1422:
1415:
1408:
1402:
1360:
1343:
1334:
1332:
1314:
1303:
1283:
1276:
1270:
1263:
1257:
1250:
1244:
1238:
1232:
1226:
1220:
1213:99.236.113.8
1162:
1153:
1147:
1121:
995:
994:
988:
987:
982:
977:
976:
928:
913:Dennis Brown
912:
907:
882:
867:Dennis Brown
866:
826:
811:Dennis Brown
810:
784:
769:Dennis Brown
768:
752:
748:
734:
719:Dennis Brown
718:
703:
702:
696:
695:
653:
642:
641:
635:
634:
621:
606:Dennis Brown
605:
592:
591:
585:
584:
563:
562:
556:
555:
530:
515:Dennis Brown
514:
486:
471:Dennis Brown
470:
453:
437:
422:Dennis Brown
421:
398:
397:
391:
390:
385:
354:
343:
342:
336:
335:
299:
285:
283:
267:
266:
260:
259:
249:
243:
223:
216:
210:
203:
197:
190:
184:
178:
172:
166:
160:
125:
119:
108:
101:
95:
88:
82:
75:
69:
62:
55:
49:
29:
1548:Jethro Tull
1476:investigate
1361:Clerk note:
1254:proxy check
194:proxy check
123:investigate
1672:- CU will
1439:block user
1432:filter log
1261:block user
1236:filter log
1016:Radiopathy
201:block user
176:filter log
86:block user
79:filter log
1644:Evanh2008
1613:Evanh2008
1602:incident.
1465:CheckUser
1452:block log
1445:spi block
1287:CheckUser
1274:block log
1267:spi block
1163:Unrelated
1068:block log
252:this diff
227:CheckUser
214:block log
207:spi block
112:CheckUser
99:block log
92:spi block
1829:Join WER
1412:contribs
1230:contribs
1156:This is
930:Join WER
884:Join WER
828:Join WER
786:Join WER
736:Join WER
670:Is this
658:WilliamH
623:Join WER
532:Join WER
488:Join WER
439:Join WER
170:contribs
59:contribs
20: |
1136:(สlษส)
1102:(สlษส)
672:helpful
654:confirm
1800:GabeMc
1774:GabeMc
1741:GabeMc
1696:GabeMc
1556:GabeMc
1482:cuwiki
1318:GabeMc
1080:(talk)
1054:(talk)
1028:(talk)
897:GabeMc
856:GabeMc
844:GabeMc
798:GabeMc
758:GabeMc
677:GabeMc
545:GabeMc
500:GabeMc
460:GabeMc
377:โขtalkโข
322:โขtalkโข
129:cuwiki
1538:Slade
1242:WHOIS
1172:Coren
996:Vesey
908:names
753:until
704:Vesey
643:Vesey
593:Vesey
564:Vesey
399:Vesey
344:Vesey
268:Vesey
182:WHOIS
16:<
1788:talk
1784:DoRD
1763:talk
1759:DoRD
1730:7754
1727:chen
1713:7754
1710:chen
1685:7754
1682:chen
1633:7754
1630:chen
1589:have
1426:logs
1400:talk
1369:talk
1248:RBLs
1218:talk
1185:talk
1181:DoRD
989:Ryan
978:only
841:. ~
839:here
697:Ryan
662:talk
636:Ryan
586:Ryan
557:Ryan
392:Ryan
337:Ryan
261:Ryan
256:here
188:RBLs
158:talk
73:logs
47:talk
1790:)โ
1765:)โ
1674:not
1469:log
1406:tag
1291:log
1224:tag
1187:)โ
749:who
454:why
231:log
164:tag
116:log
53:tag
1818:2ยข
1815:-
1724:Rs
1707:Rs
1679:Rs
1627:Rs
1609:is
1550:,
1471:)
1458:CA
1371:)
1154:b)
1148:a)
1131:DQ
1097:DQ
1072:โ
1046:โ
1020:โ
919:2ยข
916:-
873:2ยข
870:-
817:2ยข
814:-
775:2ยข
772:-
725:2ยข
722:-
664:)
612:2ยข
609:-
521:2ยข
518:-
477:2ยข
474:-
428:2ยข
425:-
369:th
366:pa
363:io
360:ad
333:.
314:th
311:pa
308:io
305:ad
118:)
105:CA
1823:ยฉ
1786:(
1761:(
1578:.
1533:.
1485:)
1479:ยท
1473:ยท
1467:(
1462:ยท
1455:ยท
1449:ยท
1442:ยท
1436:ยท
1429:ยท
1423:ยท
1416:ยท
1409:ยท
1403:ยท
1398:(
1367:(
1339:.
1295:)
1293:)
1289:(
1284:ยท
1277:ยท
1271:ยท
1264:ยท
1258:ยท
1251:ยท
1245:ยท
1239:ยท
1233:ยท
1227:ยท
1221:ยท
1216:(
1183:(
1044:.
924:ยฉ
878:ยฉ
822:ยฉ
780:ยฉ
730:ยฉ
690:)
686:(
660:(
617:ยฉ
526:ยฉ
482:ยฉ
433:ยฉ
386:I
372:y
357:R
317:y
302:R
290:.
235:)
233:)
229:(
224:ยท
217:ยท
211:ยท
204:ยท
198:ยท
191:ยท
185:ยท
179:ยท
173:ยท
167:ยท
161:ยท
156:(
132:)
126:ยท
120:ยท
114:(
109:ยท
102:ยท
96:ยท
89:ยท
83:ยท
76:ยท
70:ยท
63:ยท
56:ยท
50:ยท
45:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.