| Revision as of 20:55, 24 February 2014 editBishonen (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators80,291 edits →FYI new business: Mr Be Bold← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:18, 24 February 2014 edit undoArcticocean (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Extended confirmed users46,227 edits →Be bold: cNext edit → | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
| ==Be bold== | ==Be bold== | ||
| Well aren't you the golden boy? You unarchive a case and nobody reverts you, you don't even get a chance to edit war and be blocked, nobody even ''complains'', and the arbs quite meekly start a motion to strongly admonish! Nobody but you could have gotten away with it! I shall henceforth address you as "Mr Be Bold". :-) (P.S., Ihardlythinkso and others, this is merely a compliment on Giano's sense of timing, please don't take it as an invitation to further commentary on anybody involved in the case.) ] | ] 20:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC). | Well aren't you the golden boy? You unarchive a case and nobody reverts you, you don't even get a chance to edit war and be blocked, nobody even ''complains'', and the arbs quite meekly start a motion to strongly admonish! Nobody but you could have gotten away with it! I shall henceforth address you as "Mr Be Bold". :-) (P.S., Ihardlythinkso and others, this is merely a compliment on Giano's sense of timing, please don't take it as an invitation to further commentary on anybody involved in the case.) ] | ] 20:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC). | ||
| : Nobody complained about the revert because it was about to be done by one of us. The case should never have been archived, as its acceptance was not mathematically impossible. Now that the main business is out of the way (the motion is passing), ''I'll'' complain: you must not revert a clerk like that. If you do it again, I shall have to propose a rather lengthy sanction of your account, which I'd rather not do.<p>It also occurs to me that, by reinstating the RFAR, you removed the only condition under which Seraphimblade's block could be undone—that the request is accepted or declined. As we are all gentlemen and gentle-ladies here (well, most of us are), I won't reinstate that block, but I hope this point further reminds you why your revert was terribly short-sighted. Please note I don't necessarily speak for the other arbitrators, though everything I've said here is fairly indisputable. ] ]] 23:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:18, 24 February 2014
Old messages are at:
- User talk:Giano II/archive 1 (From Oct 2004)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 2 (From Jan 2005)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 3 (From July 2005)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 4 (From Jan 2006)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 5 (From July 2006)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 6 (From Jan 2007)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 7 (From July 2007)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 8 (From Jan 2008)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 9 (From July 2008)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 10 (From Jan 2009)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 11 (From July 2009)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 12 (From Jan 2010)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 13 (From July 2010)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 14 (From Jan 2011)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 15 (From July 2011)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 16 (From Jan 2012)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 17 (From Jan 2013)
- User talk:Giano II/archive 18 (From July 2013)
- User talk:Giano/archive 19 (From Jan 2014)
 | This user has been on Misplaced Pages for 20 years, 1 month and 24 days. |
Statement: Please do not post anything further here referring to the "Kevin Gorman attacking Eric Corbett" affair. It's a great pity that the case was declined and the evidence never able to be presented. My views are widely known and remain unchanged, but in the current circumstances, I have said all I have to say, so I won't be saying anymore. Please remember that Gorman is little more than a kid himself, and the true villains are those 'off and on-wiki' who enabled him, and the five incompetent and idiotic Arbs who rejected the case. Therefore, there's no point in continuing to shout at Kevin Gorman; in a way, this reprehensible and unsatisfactory conclusion has left Kevin as adrift and defenceless as Eric. In conclusion, I'm sure Eric would want me to thank the many who supported him so very strongly - many of whom supported that important principle of civility and equality rather than Eric personally. Who knows one day, Eric Corbett may return and Kevin Gorman may mature - I'll bet money on at least one of those happening. So please no more comments here on the subject. Thanks to you all. Giano 17:51, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Please leave your message below:
FYI new business
Ihardlythinkso (talk) 02:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
- I have said all I have to say regarding this case. A lot of belated self-pitying excuses and unsound justification from the Arbcom cannot make up for the wrong done to Eric Corbett and the project. Hundreds of editors like him now know for certain that the civility and editing policies (even if now enforceable) are one sided weapons. It was a catastrophic decision and those five Arbs, who voted to decline, should resign in disgrace. Please, no more posts here about this matter - it's nauseating. Giano 08:51, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
- Message received. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 08:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Be bold
Well aren't you the golden boy? You unarchive a case and nobody reverts you, you don't even get a chance to edit war and be blocked, nobody even complains, and the arbs quite meekly start a motion to strongly admonish! Nobody but you could have gotten away with it! I shall henceforth address you as "Mr Be Bold". :-) (P.S., Ihardlythinkso and others, this is merely a compliment on Giano's sense of timing, please don't take it as an invitation to further commentary on anybody involved in the case.) Bishonen | talk 20:55, 24 February 2014 (UTC).
- Nobody complained about the revert because it was about to be done by one of us. The case should never have been archived, as its acceptance was not mathematically impossible. Now that the main business is out of the way (the motion is passing), I'll complain: you must not revert a clerk like that. If you do it again, I shall have to propose a rather lengthy sanction of your account, which I'd rather not do.
It also occurs to me that, by reinstating the RFAR, you removed the only condition under which Seraphimblade's block could be undone—that the request is accepted or declined. As we are all gentlemen and gentle-ladies here (well, most of us are), I won't reinstate that block, but I hope this point further reminds you why your revert was terribly short-sighted. Please note I don't necessarily speak for the other arbitrators, though everything I've said here is fairly indisputable. AGK 23:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)