Excuse me, but after having uploaded a couple of images and making a few edits, I have found myself blocked for no reason. Who has been accusing me of being another editor, where has this accusation been presented? Don't I have a right of response? What sort of mafiosi setup is this? Because there is no justification for this block I will either just continue editing without logging in or I will make another account.

User:Meowy, you are not allowed to create a new account to avoid your block. Please don't do it again. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not that other user! Why are you refusing to tell me where this false accusation was made and discussed and accepted?

What FisherQueen said. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 14:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"What FisherQueen said" - what is that meant to mean? She/he said nothing to me. I am not that user Meowy! I've now discovered where the accusation was initiated - it was here [1], on an administrators talk page, with my accuser actually saying he suspected that I was three other blocked editors (or should that be one other blocked editor, if those editors were all one person - I really don't care about these petty squabbles about who is who). None one of those 3 editors had done any editing on the few articles I have edited, so I wonder about the motives of my accuser. And versageek seems to have blocked me just because I have the same internet service provider as a completely different blocked user! I guess there are at least 456,999 other users in Britain with exactly the same isp number as myself ([2] "O2 currently has 457,000 fixed land-line broadband customers (O2 - June 2009 figures)". I also see that Meowy has also been incorrectly accused of sockpuppetry in the past [3].
I came to Wikipedia specifically to add some images to the Aurora Mardiganian and Near East Relief articles, from there I had a look at the articles that had links within the NER article. And for those articles I had a look at their links, and their edit histories, and also at the edit histories of the editors who had edited them to see what other articles they had been editing. In other words, I was taking the easiest way of quickly familiarising myself with the greatest number of articles that are connected to the areas that I have knowledge of and interest in. But it seems I made a big mistake in not also having a look at the talk pages of those editors, and at their interactions with each other and with administrators. Doing that would have revealed to me a lot of the unpleasant behind-the-scene activities that seem to be going on here. None of my very limited mumber of edits were disruptive, none of them were part of any edit war, all of them were constructive and positive, and I always explained my edits in the articles talk pages or edit summaries, and also asked legitimate questions in those talk pages - but, despite all that, within a week of being here I have been accused by one editor of being the sockpuppet of three different people, and then blocked after being accused of being the sockpuppet of a fourth person!

Checkuser confirmed sock. Smashville^talk 18:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]