Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/V-Dash

message: Here are the cases that relate sockpuppets to V-Dash.
*Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/V-Dash
*Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/SPD_V
*Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Mantlefish
So aparently he has a history of abusive sockpuppets. The only contact I've had with him is a fairly civil contact with him on my talk page here. I just thought I'd post this information. --Nn123645 (talk) 03:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The "accusation" was a mistaken block on your part (I apologized for it and unblocked after I asked that the SPD V CU be rerun because I was not certain if you spoke French).  As for the D&D thing, I'm sorry I even brought that issue up, and know never to engage you in debate ever again, if only because it's counterproductive and akin to arguing with a slime mold. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 06:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm not even going to gratify that with a response, in part because the evidence flat-out rebuts your own statement. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 08:23, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Not according to the diffs on the RfC. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 19:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: V-Dash, I don't know where you get the idea that you didn't make that personal attack.  This diff (and this, this, this, and this) clearly show differently.  A personal attack is a personal attack, no matter how old it is. MelicansMatkin (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Melicans, that isn't what he's contesting; he's saying that I shouldn't have warned him for it because of its age. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 02:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the clarification on that. MelicansMatkin (talk) 11:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Again, the diffs on the RfC say otherwise. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 18:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

text: There's a response section on the RfC, V-Dash.  Edit it and give your side of the tale. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 19:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Or you could give your side of the situation and see if anyone else agrees with you that this is ridiculous? Huh? Sounds like a good idea. -Sukecchi (talk) 21:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

text: A personal attack is a personal attack, no matter when it was made.  Shortly after the warning was issued (the ame day I believe) you were given a full explanation.  It was not "vague" at all.  Stop harping on about it. MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Ah, but unlike you, I dropped them.  Any person can see the matter ended when I stopped editing that section, and any person can glean from that section that they cannot debate you because you have a habit of ignoring counterpoints. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 15:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Checkuser Cases 

message: :Wishful thinking, as when we do, he starts attacking IP addresses and GFAQs users. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 22:36, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Me heat debates up with you?  You're looking for someone else. I suggest you stop assuming bad faith and making accusations sans evidence. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 02:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I would call this an attempt to make you realize how disagreeable your conduct is to almsot every Wikipedian that you have interacted with. MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I explained the warning, V-Dash.  You chose to disregard it in favor of pursuing another baseless AN/I thread against me. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 18:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  From the RfC page 

message: I have to ask, V-Dash; what exactly do you hope to achieve on Wikipedia.  It seems that wherever you go, there is inevitably an argument.  In your last 500 edits, I count barely twenty that were made on articles, and were not part of an edit war (and most of those date back to October).  Why do you come here, and what do you hope to accomplish?  It certainly doesn't seem as if you are here to help build an encyclopedia. MelicansMatkin (talk) 05:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Query for V-Dash

message: Nothing wrong has been done. Both parties are at ease. Well, I am.V-Dash (talk) 20:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be your opinion, but it's no reason to go blanking the page.  Friday (talk) 20:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In this case, I think that V-Dash's indefinite block makes this RfC a moot point.  I have no objections to closing this case... although I wish it didn't have to come to V-Dash getting a permanent vacation. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 08:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't it obvious by this point he had no intention of changing his ways? I think it's for the best really... -Sukecchi (talk) 13:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This case is closed