Krett123
Twinkle usage
change
This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Krett123 (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)
Request reason:
I want to use one of my doppelganger accounts to test "hacking twinkle" to see if I can make it work for a non-autoconfirmed user so we can fix the glitch. Normally doppelganger accounts don't get used for editing but they are my only account besides this one and I was told to not create any new ones. Valid use? --Krett12 (talk) 05:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
There is already a very trivial way to "hack twinkle" to "make it work for a non-autoconfirmed user". There is not likely that there will be any way to fix this effectively due to the nature of userscripts. -- Chenzw Talk 05:44, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
- Yes there is---only let autoconfirmed users use JS and Css pages. Krett12 (talk) 05:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Krett123 (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)
Request reason:
I would like to try this as I am very big on security and want to get this patched up. Please? Krett12 (talk) 05:58, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Decline reason:
There is no security impact in allowing non-autoconfirmed users to use Twinkle. Also, as I mentioned above, a trivial way already exists to allow non-autoconfirmed users to use Twinkle. -- Chenzw Talk 06:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Djsasso, Only, Auntof6, and Enfcer: Because I processed the first unblock request on this page, I hope one of you can help to also look into this particular request. Chenzw Talk 06:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm probably not the best one to respond, either, since I'm the one who originally blocked Krett12's alternate accounts. However, I would not approve this request for any of Krett12's accounts. For one thing, he doesn't say enough to explain what the problem is: I can't tell if the problem is that non-autoconfirmed can use Twinkle, or that they can't, but I don't see a problem with it either way. Besides that, I wouldn't want to give more access to a user whose main account has already been blocked twice for being disruptive. Do we really want him being disruptive with multiple accounts? In my eyes, he has not shown himself to be a trusted user, so I say no. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
- I too am not sure I am the best to review this as I was one of those who blocked the main account for disruptive edits. But I do not feel that we need to allow the use of an alternate account for such testing. --Enfcer (talk) 00:32, 29 December 2015 (UTC)