Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Chadbryant: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 12:02, 14 December 2006

Revision as of 20:46, 14 December 2006

Line 8:

Now, and this is also unusual, I know, what I would like if this is accepted is a response where the benefit of the doubt lies with the blocking admin, rather than the accused. Given the diffs we have, it is '''extremely''' suggestive; however, if the checkuser results come back with no possible links (eg. no proxies, in different countries etc.), then the admins may have to grant a benefit of the doubt. If they're in the same area, state even, or proxies are somehow involved, the admins will simply discard the technical evidence as being not 100% either way, and go on the diffs. I hope you get my drift :) '''[[User:Daniel.Bryant|Daniel.Bryant]] ^{[ [[User talk:Daniel.Bryant|T]] · [[Special:Contributions/Daniel.Bryant|C]] ]}''' 11:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

:I am the blocking administrator. It seemed clear to me but the user subsequently promised he was not a sockpuppet. On the basis that we need to double-check administrators when they admit they may have made a mistake, I'd like a checkuser performed here as well. Please. --[[User:Yamla|Yamla]] 20:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

<noinclude>