User talk:Kcin2424

Sign on talk pages
Please sign when editing a talk page. Use ~ to sign your talk page edit with a timestamp. Thank you, 01:31, June 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * I have tried I guess it wasn't going through. I'll see if it was me doing something wrong somehow. Kcin2424 (talk) 01:52, June 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. Just wanted to make sure you were aware that talk pages should be signed and how to do that. 01:57, June 5, 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay so I have been putting the 4 tildes at the end but the site says I didn't so how do I know if it is working? Kcin2424 (talk) 02:44, June 5, 2015 (UTC)

Unblock 1
I have been framed and accused by admins who will not listen to me and will not even try to let me prove myself innocent. The two accounts they claim to be me are obviously made for the sole purpose of framing me, one is my name with Zamorak on it, then the other one is my name with Zaros on it and that one is a clear copy paste of my PUBLIC description. There is no evidence that those 2 are mine, but instead the conspiracy that I used a tor to make those 2 but the admins will not believe that someone else used a tor site to hide their ip to make those 2.
 * You are not being framed. We have all the evidence we need to be sure that all three accounts are you, and that your block stands. Quite frankly I am getting fed up and tired of your nonsense. There is no conspiracy, there is no framing going on. There is you thinking that you are exempt from the rules and that anybody who disagrees is a conspirator. We do not have to let you prove yourself innocent because you are not innocent. We know that those two accounts are owned by you, due to them using identical IPs as yourself, Zamorak's only non userspace edit being identical to your previous edits, and the timing of the account creations in relation to your appeal denials and blocking. This is your fourth appeal to be denied in 14 hours, and the third in 2 hours. You are doing yourself no favours by accusing us of conspiracy 16:17, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

Unblock 2
. Would I really go through all this trouble to show that I was wrongly blocked? You claim I used a tor, but you refuse to believe someone used a tor against me. How does that show a fair block? Oh but there is, for if I was going to make another account to avoid a ONE DAY BLOCK I woudln't use anything that would tie back to my account as that is just bad because it would lead straight back to me. I would definately not make a 3rd account and copy paste my whole description onto it. As well as I wouldn't waste over an hour trying to get an unblock I would have just made another account using a tor like you think I did. I am not thinking I am exempt from the rules, I admitted I misunderstood the revert rule. I accpeted the block for that I was waiting the day and continued to talk on my talk page. In this case that you are claiming I sock puppeted I did not break any rules because THOSE ACCOUNTS ARE NOT ME. I am innocent why won't you believe that. It is clearly infront of you I wouldn't go through this process if I had a way to go around a block like you think I did. Everyone has acess to this page, anyone can see all that goes on, it isn't hard for someone to make 2 account framing me. I will keep appealing untill someone actually deals with this. I have broken no rules.Kcin2424 (talk) 16:24, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * You are abusing the block appeal. I advise you stop and wait out your block. If you insist on continuing to appeal, your talk page rights may be revoked 16:36, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Then why don't you actually look into the appeal? I doubt you have even done a user check on all the accounts. Now do your job as an admin and actually look into the appeal.Kcin2424 (talk) 19:43, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

Block appeal
I was not edit warring I was changing the page based upon the discussion page and what was proven correct. I undid a post that changed it back to being false information that was proven wrong. I do not see how that is edit warring.
 * I'm going to deny this, given that you have been warned about this in the past. The block is only for one day anyway. Your main argument against a block is that you contend that the statement "The Godless are Guthixian in nature" is fact per the talk page. Reviewing the talk page, I see no determination of that. This is indeed a violation of RS:3RR. I encourage you to read the policy in detail. If you have further questions let me know. 03:06, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * You were [ warned by Gaz] that continuing to change the wording would result in a block; you instead immediately resumed edit warring as soon as the page protection expired. RS:3RR also has a section specific to lore that you should read:
 * "In the case of lore-related articles, do not in substance revert a previous revert to the article. Content disputes should be taken to the article's talk page (and involved parties should be notified), and no further related edits should take place to the relevant sections until the conflict is resolved."


 * -- 03:12, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Please can you tell me how provding evidence, quoted from in game sources, about the lore and origin of the godless and the nature of their faction is false. It was not proven to be false there was no evidence showing that it isn't Guthixian in nature but there was evidence that it was. It is hard to discuss a topic when no one reads the discussion and the person who was debating that it wasn't guthixian in nature left after not being able to provide evidence as to why it isn't. The lore backed up what was being changed there was nothing proving it was false. Kcin2424 (talk) 03:30, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Whether or not they are is beside the point. You can be right and still engage in edit warring (and be blocked for it). But, I'll address your point anyway. I don't believe that the quote you provided is sufficient evidence to show that they are Guthixian in nature. To be considered Guthixian, they would have to identify themselves followers of both Guthix and his teachings, and I see little to demonstrate either. I should say that the burden of proof point you brought up on the talk page is not correct either; when making an affirmative statement (such as "The Godless are Guthixian"), the burden of proof lies with the affirmative side. If you want a community-wide discussion on this subject you can start a thread on the Yew Grove. 03:42, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * On top of providing evidence backing up what I was saying and nothing saying it was false besides one person's opinion I reviewed the guidlines you told me about and have these comments about it. I was at 3 edits and stopped then posted in the discussion to talk about it there, the next thing I know I was blocked. I did not make 3 posts to the page I made 3 and then went into the discussion to talk about it more. As well as why was the other guy not blocked because he was doing the same thing that I was so if I was blocked why was he not?Kcin2424 (talk) 03:47, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * To be Guthixian in nature would be to have roots in Guthix's teachings which they do, and I provided evidence of that. As per the burdon of proof I provided evidence that back up my point the other person who was not proving points to disprove and back their side that burdon of proof lies on them.  I did not say they were Guthixian I said they are inherently Guthixian which means "existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute." which I showed how following the teachings of Guthix was a permanent essential and a characteristic attribute of the Godless so they are inherently Guthixian even though they are not a Guthixian faction. Kcin2424 (talk) 03:51, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * He will be if he does it again; I warned him. 08:42, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * So why did I get blocked and he wasn't he was warned at the same time as me. As well as my other points of I was within the rules and about the discussion.Kcin2424 (talk) 13:39, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * You were not within the rules this time. You reverted a revert of a lore based article when the conflict had not yet been resolved, which violates 3RR. Kinglink in this case only reverted it back to its pre-conflict state until the conflict had been resolved. It seems pretty clear to me that the conflict has not been resolved, as the discussion is still ongoing 14:19, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

Unblock 4
I was following the rules, I was discussing on my talk page since I wouldn't discuss the topic anywhere else. There is no proof that I have broken a rule nor any rule given that I have broken. This is misuse of power to only help the other side in the discussion. Which is against the RS Wiki rules given here "However, blocking may not be used:
 * to gain an advantage in a content dispute.
 * in the case where a block is unnecessary and a warning would suffice.
 * as a precautionary measure, unless obvious evidence is given." Which I feel at this point is what the admins are doing to me. Kcin2424 (talk) 14:45, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * A few years ago, there were times when certain users would continuously revert one another's lore edits and refused to attempt to reach a compromise until the page was protected. A lot of us got sick of having to deal with it so we made an amendment to 3RR to deal specifically with lore - anybody who reverted a revert of a lore edit until the issue was resolved would be in violation of this rule, and would be blocked to prevent yet another pointless edit war. You reverted kinglink's revert of your lore edit while the content was still being disputed, which means that you have been blocked to prevent further edit warring. We are not getting involved in the content dispute itself, you have already been warned several days earlier, and there is obvious evidence for your block as a precautionary measure 15:01, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * I have clearly tried to discuss it on the Discussion page, and then when I was blocked I moved the discussion to the talk page. So I don't see how that is not an attempt to reach a compromise/discuss the topic at hand. I stopped at 3 revisions and then moved to the discussion/talk pages. I was not told I could not undo a revert that was made to something I edited was against the rules. So I thought undoing that was just setting it back to what I edited based on what was said and what the ending conclusion was(because one party stopped trying to prove his side) on the discussion page. I did not see the content as not being disputed as the discussion stopped on June 7th and didn't start back up till the page was unprotected. You are stopping me from discussing the topic anymore and hence you are getting invovled in the content as I cannot provide my side. I felt that a gap of June 7th -June 13th was a big enough gap to show that the dispute was resolved.Kcin2424 (talk) 15:08, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * You can add your contributions via your talk page. We consider a dispute settled when both sides have come to an agreement, not cause one side stops arguing their point 15:13, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * How can I add them via my talk page? How was an agreement supposed to come if there was just stop of discussion after defending my side and what I meant once again and a 5 day gap came after that?Kcin2424 (talk) 15:30, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Put your side of the argument on your talk page and wait for people to respond to it. Much like how you've been handling your appeal 15:32, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Who would come to my talk page to try and find my points on the topic when you guys won't even consider I am getting framed by someone. I asked the person I have been discussing to see if he will add it to the page so that people might actually discuss what I am saying but it doesn't look like he has and I don't think anyone will ever go to my talk page outside of admins from that page.Kcin2424 (talk) 15:36, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sure somebody will see it. As for his refusal to add your contributions to the talk page, that is on him and not on us. If you wish to contribute to the discussion during your block then you will have to use your talk page and hope somebody pays attention. There is nothing else that can be done and your claims that we are discriminating against you will solve nothing, so kindly stop 15:43, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah there is something you can do to help. Actually unblock me from a block that I had no part in doing. why would I go through all this trouble proving myself innocent, or all the trouble to set up a tor server make 2 accounts to avoid a day long block that was already about 12 hours completed with only about 12 hours left?Kcin2424 (talk) 15:49, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

Re:Untitled
I named it untitled seeingg no title was givien for that message. Now, as I can see, instead of looking for the proof I gave you like a BIG BOY. I guess I gotta hold your hand and walk you through it. Look at the discussion page ok? 03:58, June 13, 2015 (UTC) Guthix: I was foolish; my plan would never work. I will continue my tale along the path. Please, meet me when you are ready. Guthix: I should have seen it coming. I introduced them to the world, I had a power greater than they had ever seen. Guthix: The mortal races began to worship me. They built shrines to me, made sacrifices. They waited on my every word. Guthix: It pained me deeply to see myself becoming what I had always loathed. Guthix: They should not have been living beneath me, serving me. I wanted them to be free, balanced, to make their own decisions. Guthix: The races brought in by the now-banished gods remained, and disrupted the balance at every turn. Battles raged on, in the names of the absent gods."
 * Your edit does not disprove my point and your flame shows me you know I am correct so please stop the flame. I AM NOT SAYING THEY ARe GUTHIXIAN I am saying they have roots in Guthix's teachings hence they are inherently Guthixian aka they have "existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute" of Guthix that being his teachings which is the basis of their whole faction.Kcin2424 (talk) 04:04, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Rightm Flame, I disaproved you so where you claim they are Guthixian in nature which they are not, and by looking at others on this page, they even agree they aren't, and that you proved nothing, What I proved was how Guthix was god of balance, something u asked in the discuss page. How they are not Guthixian in Nature, again it is there read it all again. I will stop disrespecting you and"flaming" as you wish for it, and I do apologies for any as It was late at night, and your continue edit, after 1 person jumped in and reverted your edit, and another blocked it remaining how it is, and even one in the page showed that they see no proof of how they are Guthixian in nature, This is where you cannot edit it claiming you are right, with out others agreeing. So either way, You cannot add your opinion, or something you thin kis fact if other donot agree. So I ask if you do not edit the page any more until you got people on the discuss page, and here to agree with you.
 * SO I do apologies for the "flaming" but You have no point, or are right as other disagree with you. The only thing you provided in the talk page is how they became godless over a death wish, which I proved isn't a teaching of Guthix So until there is Acutal words from a Jagex worker saying they are Guthixian in Nature, please do not add that information anymore, as others have told you they do not agree. You can continue to try and discuss it in the talk page with others, but leave teh page alone until then. 13:18, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * The others on this page think i mean that they are a guthixian faction WHICH IS NOT WHAT i AM SAYING and yes you are flaming when you say things that are trying to demean another person or try to get a reaction out of them and your "big boy" talk is exactly that. You have not disproven that they are inherently guthixian because you have not shown that they don't have any permanent part by Guthix or any essential part from Guthix or any characteristic from guthix. I have been over the god of balance with you already, sure he is the God of balance but THAT IS NOT HIS ONLY PHILOSOPHY. I have given you quotes showing that, from Guthix himself. They didn ot see any proof of how they are a Guthixian faction and not what I was actually saying. So there is still plently of proof of what I am saying. Something that I have proven as fact and people cannot read correctly so they think they are right. I ask you not to edit the page to false information untill you actually read and comprehend what I said. What I said was proven correct. Do I really have to show you all the quotes again showing how it is a Guthix teaching. Since you can't read there I will post it here as well then.
 * This is guthix's belief and his philosophy this is taken from the world wakes:
 * "Guthix: I chose tribes who had no concept of gods, and I brought them to Gielinor, to live uninfluenced lives while I retained the balance.


 * Please tell me how that has nothing to do with no gods teaching.
 * And here is the other point that backs up that they follow Guthix's teachings and are Guthixian IN NATURE and not a Guthixian faction.
 * But Guthix never wanted me - us - to worship him. He wanted to abandon the notion of worship completely, so that he could retire and leave the world to mortals. When Kaqemeex told me that, a fog cleared. Everything I'd thought until then was wrong. - Book of the Gods/GodlessKcin2424 (talk) 13:54, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * The others on this page don't think you mean they are guthixian, they just disagree that they are Guthixian in Nature, you are only proving nothing more than a information on them being made. Again, They aren't Guthixian in nature, unless stated otherwise by Jagex, so please lets end this conversation, you are already corssing a line you shouldn't 14:35, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Since I cannot edit that page for a week because admin abuse in trying to help your side which is against the RS wiki rules on blocking can you post this for me there?
 * To be Guthixian in nature in the sense I am saying is this: To follow the teachins of Guthix as told by both Guthix himself during the world wakes and Biehn in the book of the Godless. I am not saying they are a Guthixian faction I am saying they have roots in the teachings of Guthix, sure they do not follow his being as god of balance, but they follow his teachings of have no gods on Gielinor.
 * If you could post that there for me I would be thankful as that will help make clear what I am saying and hopefully will resolve the confusion in what I am saying.Kcin2424 (talk) 14:50, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

Block Extension
I have extended your block to a week due to sockpuppeting using User:Kcin of Zamorak, and blocked that account indefinitely. If you wish to continue editing, I highly advise not creating any more sockpuppets and come back in a week. If you sockpuppet again, I will extend your block significantly. 14:21, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * What?? What are you talking about? I am confused, I only have a day block why would I do anything that would harm me further? I was patentily waiting and disussing with the guy on this page since you blocked me from talking with him on the discussion page. Do you have any evidence as to why I would do that?Kcin2424 (talk) 14:41, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * The linked account used exactly the same discussion point as you just did here, and has a similar name. I also ran a checkuser, and it came up positive. Please don't pretend that it isn't you. 14:48, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Could you please provide a matching IP address? Kcin is not that uncommon of a name thre are a lot of people who use that name, myself including, which mine is based off of my RS name. From what it looks like from what I saw on the discussion page he was only clarifying the confusion and not backing myself up. So please tell me again why you are using the block in a way that it is not supposed to be used.Kcin2424 (talk) 14:53, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * The IP addresses are exactly the same. I am not going to give it out for security reasons. 14:58, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there a way you can give them to me in private means, because if they are the same and you claim they are, and they are both the same what would the privacy issue be if both are the same ip which is mine. Kcin2424 (talk) 15:03, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, using TOR to mask your IP doesn't work because we have an extension to identify TOR exit nodes. So your new account User:Kcin of Zaros isn't safe either. And you're just digging yourself an even bigger hole by continuing to make attempts at ban evasion. 15:06, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * To be quite frank, we don't even need checkuser. First and foremost is the uncanny timing of the second account's creation. Created at 1:44 (?), a mere 5 minutes before this account was blocked (01:49). Just as damning is its only contributions are exactly the same as yours. That's definitely enough to say "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck." The checkuser matched your IPs, which is really as definitive as it gets. Also, as an aside, kcin isn't that common of a name. Your 2 accounts are the only ones with that name registered.
 * tl;dr Duck.png 15:04, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * I honestly have no clue what you are talking about at this point, I have never used a tor nor do I know where to even get one. Okay, now I know I am getting set up here because I have never seen that user before. The person clearly copy pasted my description. Is there a way I can contact you privately to prove that the person who is Kcin of Zamorak, and Kcin of Zaros is not me? You will ask me something/I will tell you something and then you ask both of those what I said and if it doesn't match 100% or come near close then that proves they are not me. How am I supposed to prove someone who is using a Tor server to frame me and get me probably banned forever from editing. Please let me prove it that those 2 are not me somehow.Kcin2424 (talk) 15:15, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * No offense, but no one cares enough about you to go through all this just to get you banned here. I mean, you have a point. Is there a 100% certain way to prove that is definitely you? No, not really. But how likely is it that this is all some crazy conspiracy to get you banned from editing a video game website? Basically 0. 15:18, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Clearly someone does, because they are clearly setting me up, making 2 acocunts using my name but with a slight variation and then blatanly copy pasting my own page onto theirs to make it look like that is me. Please let me somehow prove they are not me, is there any private means of communiation, be it email or some way through this site(if there is one) to answer a question to prove they are not me? Someone is going through all of this the reason I have no clue what is it, but they are. There are people on the internet who have to much time/just want to hurt others. Since you are so sure that both of those are me then it shouldn't be a problem to prove it through private means.Kcin2424 (talk) 15:21, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * No, they're not. And we shouldn't have to humor these ridiculous claims. Gaz already performed an IP check, and there's no reason to doubt him. I suggest refocusing your efforts towards something more useful. 15:23, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Please I am begging, these are not ridiculous claims this is clear identity fraud. If you are so sure why are not you even going to try to show that they are 100% me? I am focusing my efforts on proving myself innocent which I am. Why are you not even thinking of all possibilities. You(or one of you) yourself claimed I used a tor to hide my IP which in itself would be a stretch to try and avoid a 1 day block that was probably half through already. Why would I go through all this, move the discussion to my talk in order to get my side if I was just going to do that? What is more useful than trying to prove that the people who are attempting to frame me are not me.Kcin2424 (talk) 15:27, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * We cannot show you the evidence for security concerns, but we are confident that the evidence we have that indicates that all three kcin accounts are you is true. You claim that it will not matter if you are both on the same IP, but if we gave it out and somebody used it to against you somehow such as hacking then we could be held responsible. I advise you to stop trying to claim that the world is conspiring against you and just wait for your block to expire 15:37, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * GAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. I am no longer asking you to show me evidence(which at this point I know there is none) I am asking you to set up some way to privately talk with me, and then do the same for the other 2 accounts you claim to be me. Ask all of us the same question and then if any of them match another account then that shows they are the same. Please tell me why you do not think I would go through all the effort to make 2 accounts using a tor server to avoid a half day longer block?Kcin2424 (talk) 15:45, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Would I really go through an hour debating trying to get you to provide me some way to prove myself innocent if those accounts were me? They are blantaly fakes and are literally can be clearly seen to frame meKcin2424 (talk) 15:56, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

This message is a purely objective interpretation of your comment/suggestion. I, again, take no sides or part in the actual discussion at hand. How exactly will your suggestion of "opening private lines of communication to all three account owners and ask them the same question" prove beyond the question of a doubt that they are not the same human person? In the case that all three accounts are actually managed by the same person, they must simply reply to the question differently on each account and would thus be "cleared of all suspicion". There is a hole in your logic. IP83.101.44.209 (talk) 16:04, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Where is the logic in the fact that they have the conspiracy that i used a tor site to make 2 other accounts, but they won't believe when I say someone else did that. I have gone through over an hours worth of time trying to show myself innocent would I really go through all that just to know I am not? No, the acocunt Kcin of Zaros is the clearest form of  a fraud account you could get, take a name, change it a little copy paste description. There has been absolutely nothing showing the connection between me and those 2 accounts.Kcin2424 (talk) 16:09, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * 17:05, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Chekcuser Kcin of Zaros and you will know I didn't make those accountsKcin2424 (talk) 20:55, June 13, 2015 (UTC)

Yet another section
I'm going to talk about stuff here.

I was first contacted about this edit war about a week ago, probably via Mol in IRC. I looked through the edits and protected the page, since it was clear there was a war going on and it should be moved to the talk page. I later issued the warning on the talk page. I also reworded the section to attempt to alleviate the issues - apparently that was not satisfactory to you two. A week later, when the protection expired and I was asleep, the war restarted, and you were blocked as the re-reverter, per my warning and 3RR. It was only for a day, but about 12 hours later you made a new account which began to sock, continuing the discussion while you were banned.

I ran a checkuser which showed it was you. For this I blocked the sockpuppet indefinitely and extended the main account's block to a week. For confirmation, here's the checkuser result (IP address removed for security reasons); also, the previous IP for this account (Kcin2424) is in the same /8 range as the current one, so I have no doubt that you're the owner of both. You then made a third account via TOR, presumably thinking hiding your IP address would allow you to edit unknown. Just so you're aware, after the first account, any (fairly) new account or IP that edited that talk page (or this one), making the same arguments you did would be suspicious, whether it was using your name or not, TOR or not. I blocked that third account too.

And now here we are, having attempted to ban evade after I asked you not to. I was planning to extend your block again, to a month. But I'm not going to right now.

You're obviously a dedicated editor, having made many account to ban evade just to discuss an article - this isn't someone evading to vandalise, you clearly want to improve the article in your way. I appreciate that - we want dedicated editors. But this is not the way to go about it. Making multiple accounts and lying isn't earning anyone's favour.

So I'm going to give you a chance. If you just wait out the rest of your block, you can return and continue the discussion on the talk page. If the other editors want to come and discuss it here while you're blocked, that's fine too. But if you make more accounts to try to evade your ban or sockpuppet, I will extend your block to a month. If you edit war again, you'll likely be blocked again, too. I highly advise you to think this over and just wait for the block to expire, then come to an agreement with the other editors on the talk page. Maybe edit other pages too, so you're not consumed by your opinion on the godless article. Take some time to cooldown, rethink your position, maybe re-read our policies, particularly 3RR and consensus. Apologies would be a bonus.

Cheers, 16:59, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * "It was only for a day, but about 12 hours later you made a new account which began to sock, continuing the discussion while you were banned."
 * This is the first part that doesn't make sense, I only had 12 hours left why would I do anything to risk making it longer? Check one for first illogical statement.
 * As per your screenshot does not include Kcin of Zaros. Which you also claim to be me. So not having that on the test but still claim it is me. Check two for illogical statement.
 * And now here we are, having attempted to ban evade after I asked you not to." Which I haven't done, why  again would I go through all this trouble for avoiding a 1 day ban that was half over. Check 3 for illogical statement.
 * "Making multiple accounts and lying isn't earning anyone's favour." How many times do I have to say. Why would I go through all this trouble, take a discussion onto my own talk page after getting handed a 1 day block because I didn't fully understand a rule which I accepted.
 * I have not made a single account besides this one for the RS wiki how many times do I have to reiterate that? Also it is not opinion the claim I am making is backed by two sources of lore within the game.
 * I would love an apology from you guys that would be amazing. Oh you were talking about me giving you an apology? For what you accusing me of somethign I didn't do, then not believing me after I tried multiple times to try and be able to show I am innocent? Check 4 for illogical statements. Kcin2424 (talk) 19:54, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you would make an account to evade a one-day block - you tell me, you did it. But that's by the by. You can prove that you're willing to contribute within the bounds of policies when you block expires in about a week. If you show that you cannot, you'll end up blocked again. 20:16, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Because I didn't I took the discussion to the talk page that's what I did. I see you still have yet to do that scan thing on Kcin of Zaros, maybe its because you know you guys are wrong and you just don't want to apologize or show that you guys make mistakes. All the things show that I would not make an account to avoid a one day block
 * 1)I took the discussion to the talk page
 * 2)I admitted I misunderstood the rules and would take the 1 day block(which I was 12 hours in the process to before the person started to frame me)
 * 3)Spend hours trying to get it shown that I did not make those accounts.
 * Why don't you checkuser on Kcin of Zaros?Kcin2424 (talk) 20:54, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Because we know for a fact that it was using TOR, which masks the IP. We know for a fact that Kcin of Zamorak is you. At this point, we should just ban you forever, because you're clearly full of it. 20:59, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * It's because you know I DIDN'T MAKE THOSE ACCOUNTS. If I was going to use a tor to make those accounts to continue on the discussion on the discussion page wouldn't I be doing that already with new accounts? Since you think I did it explain to me why it isn't happening right now? Oh wait you can't because I didn't use a tor to make any accounts I didn't make any accounts besides this one. Usercheck it or unblock me at the end of today.Kcin2424 (talk) 21:48, June 13, 2015 (UTC)
 * Nope :) -- 21:50, June 13, 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for admitting you know I did nothing wrong and you are just abusing your admin powers now.Kcin2424 (talk) 21:51, June 13, 2015 (UTC)