One admin who should be desysoped, and five others that perhaps should be if they do not respond to anything but legal threats.
Bohgosity BumaskiL
I do not see that [[user:moonriddengirl|moonridden girl]] haz the
right to delete notes on other user's talk pages that are in my
defence, and that attack no one. At this point, '''she''' is being
disruptive, so '''she''', for asking me to be blocked, when she is
speaking for several other users, claiming that they do not want to
talk to me...she should be blocked for seventy two hours. Speaking for
others is the act of a lawyer.
[ http://edmc.net/~brewhaha/Sound/WhoWe.mp3 We means you and me. Who
are we? Speak for yourself.] [[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/75.159.15.217
|75.159.15.217]] ([[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:75.159.15.217 #top|talk]])
13:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
== [[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:moonriddengirl ]] had no
business making these edits. BLOCK HER! ==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jayron32&oldid=429870021]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mangojuice&oldid=429869965]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jehochman&oldid=429869952]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sandstein&oldid=429869956]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steve_Smith&oldid=429869948]
How differs a road-killed lawyer from a road-kill skunk?Skid marks are
before the skunk.
[[Special:Contributions/75.159.15.217|75.159.15.217]] ([[User
talk:75.159.15.217#top|talk]]) 14:08, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
The alternative to blocking her is to accept one rule for me, and
another for yourself.
At the very least, you should ask her if that sounds fair.
[[Special:Contributions/75.159.15.217|75.159.15.217]] ([[User
talk:75.159.15.217#top|talk]]) 16:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/ BrewJay's Babble Bin
Lewin Bormann
2011 01:45:
> I do not see that [[user:moonriddengirl|moonridden girl]] haz the
> right to delete notes on other user's talk pages that are in my
> defence, and that attack no one.
I think so, too. Nobody has anywhere any rights to change notes on any talk
pages, not?
LB
--
Private Mails an news~lewin-bormann.de (~=@)
Bohgosity BumaskiL
Hash: SHA1
Lewin Bormann wrote:
> Bohgosity BumaskiL <brew...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> wrote on Freitag
> 20 Mai 2011 01:45:
>=20
>> I do not see that [[user:moonriddengirl|moonridden girl]] haz the
>> right to delete notes on other user's talk pages that are in my
>> defence, and that attack no one.
>=20
> I think so, too. Nobody has anywhere any rights to change notes on
> any talk pages, not?
>=20
> LB
My personal rules varied from that. For example, there was one
guy who clearly believed that a good offense was the best
defense, so I wanted to end the conversation. I did. I condensed
the whole conversation into a one line summary of the answer to
my question on HIZ talk page, directing the conversation closed.
I treated my talk page like an e-mail INBOX. My deletion of your
words did not indicate acceptance or denial.
There was one instance where I deleted someone's comment from
someone else's INBOX. It did not happen again. There was a
useful instance, where I put titles on and organized topics on
the talk page for prion. I should've apologized to the guy whose
comments I deleted, and it was easier to leave the whole
project, which I did not formally study, anyway. The conflict
was on whether neurology and neuroscience were exact synonyms,
or whether someone could come up with rules to distinguish them
(and if not then neuroscience should disappear and neurology
take its place).
I would expect an admin to know better than to even try deleting
someone else's comments in someone else's INBOX. One rule for
me; another for an admin.
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/ BrewJay's Babble Bin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32)
Comment: http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/gpg/Keyprint_Biometric.mp3.pgp
iQCVAwUBTeMTOh47apzXdID2AQJZlwP+LF1JwpxAjffqZ34Bzt80eSrLYlCDcs0x
R+8798CWCBMx4y2CF/TNLpf5mLWebgSwR+y5AYCJS5uGc36dTXSp6+JQY2Cv73q2
PD0uy4mnzQ16oRlhw9NgrZRo5s4Z84ZvZo+7IFRrN/lqFrUtGaA18mnkGTpmlaE7
n0oM53hPQFs=3D
=3D9HE8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bohgosity BumaskiL
Hash: SHA1
Lewin Bormann wrote:
> Bohgosity BumaskiL <brew...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> wrote on Freitag
> 20 Mai 2011 01:45:
>
>> I do not see that [[user:moonriddengirl|moonridden girl]] haz the
>> right to delete notes on other user's talk pages that are in my
>> defence, and that attack no one.
>
> I think so, too. Nobody has anywhere any rights to change notes on
> any talk pages, not?
>
> LB
My personal rules varied from that. For example, there was one
guy who clearly believed that a good offense was the best
defense, so I wanted to end the conversation. I did. I condensed
the whole conversation into a one line summary of the answer to
my question on HIZ talk page, directing the conversation closed.
I treated my talk page like an e-mail INBOX. My deletion of your
words did not indicate acceptance or denial.
There was one instance where I deleted someone's comment from
someone else's INBOX. It did not happen again. There was a
useful instance, where I put titles on and organized topics on
the talk page for prion. I should've apologized to the guy whose
comments I deleted, and it was easier to leave the whole
project, which I did not formally study, anyway. The conflict
was on whether neurology and neuroscience were exact synonyms,
or whether someone could come up with rules to distinguish them
(and if not then neuroscience should disappear and neurology
take its place).
I would expect an admin to know better than to even try deleting
someone else's comments in someone else's INBOX. One rule for
me; another for an admin.
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/ BrewJay's Babble Bin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32)
Comment: http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/gpg/Keyprint_Biometric.mp3.pgp
iQCVAwUBTeMTOh47apzXdID2AQJZlwP+LF1JwpxAjffqZ34Bzt80eSrLYlCDcs0x
R+8798CWCBMx4y2CF/TNLpf5mLWebgSwR+y5AYCJS5uGc36dTXSp6+JQY2Cv73q2
PD0uy4mnzQ16oRlhw9NgrZRo5s4Z84ZvZo+7IFRrN/lqFrUtGaA18mnkGTpmlaE7
n0oM53hPQFs=
=9HE8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Bohgosity BumaskiL
They go unchallenged for days, weeks, perhaps even years. Then, some
expert, who happens to know better says: "Bullshit!". One of the
better ways to do that is with stricken text, because people who
review the article should be the first to know that a longstanding
myth is finally being challenjed. If it haz stood as fact for years,
then perhaps the stricken text should stand for az long. It would be a
brave admission that things like this happen on wikipedia. Take for
example potassium nitrate not being toxic. It is. I don't care to
prove it. I just happen to know that it stifles most fermentations, so
it would probably cause an upset in your gastrointestinal tract;
killing micro-organizms the serve you in your stomach, and probably
replacing them with something else; upset. I could do some research
and back it up. I don't care to, because two people in power managed
to badmouth all of my work and get away with it. Potassium nitrate
doesn't stifle all microflora, and a product of fermentations with
nitrate smells like bleach. I think it is chlorate or perchlorate,
because I saw words to that effect in someone's paper on the internet;
that microbes in nitrate-laden ponds are resistant to perchlorate. If
you tell me that bleach is not toxic, then I will suspect that you are
saying that because you've been drinking it.
_______
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/