| Revision as of 13:48, 2 January 2010 view sourceCarolmooredc (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,944 edits →Shameful: Double standards rule wikipedia← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:48, 2 January 2010 view source Nableezy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers56,154 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| == Shameful == | == Shameful == | ||
| This user was a very fine, upcoming editor of considerable promise, who, perhaps because of those qualities was mercilessly harassed, victimized, and driven to make one unguarded remark out of pure frustration, and fear that his block would inconvenience his fellow workers. He did little that could, in any human society, be considered troublesome. He did much to encourage disenchanted editors to renew their confidence in wikipedia as a project. Shameful, deeply shameful. For those who still read books, Melville's ] contains the moral.] (]) 23:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC) | This user was a very fine, upcoming editor of considerable promise, who, perhaps because of those qualities was mercilessly harassed, victimized, and driven to make one unguarded remark out of pure frustration, and fear that his block would inconvenience his fellow workers. He did little that could, in any human society, be considered troublesome. He did much to encourage disenchanted editors to renew their confidence in wikipedia as a project. Shameful, deeply shameful. For those who still read books, Melville's ] contains the moral.] (]) 23:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| ::Thats a lie, this user was an idiot who stupidly expected that fair play and transparency should rule. He should have instead been coordinating his moves with like-minded editors, creating countless sockpuppets, and relying on "sources" that no reasonable person would call "reliable". He should have played the game, and you can bet he would have won if he had. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| :Double standards rule wikipedia. ] (]) 13:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | :Double standards rule wikipedia. ] (]) 13:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| After things calm down, I hope you reconsider your retirement. Although you and I have had differing viewpoints on some articles, I have always appreciated your input and contributions to article discussions. Regards, --]<sup>]</sup> 02:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | After things calm down, I hope you reconsider your retirement. Although you and I have had differing viewpoints on some articles, I have always appreciated your input and contributions to article discussions. Regards, --]<sup>]</sup> 02:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :I dont know, but thanks for the kind words and take care. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
| == I'm bummed == | == I'm bummed == | ||
| Nothing more to say, really. You'll be missed. <font color="green">]</font> 03:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | Nothing more to say, really. You'll be missed. <font color="green">]</font> 03:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :Thanks. You get Sandstein to admit that his decision was retarded, and he has to use that word, Ill come back. <small style="border: 1px solid;padding:1px 3px;white-space:nowrap">''']''' - 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)</font></small> | |||
Revision as of 17:48, 2 January 2010
Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages.For reasons which I apparently will be blocked for if I write them down. Bye.
Shameful
This user was a very fine, upcoming editor of considerable promise, who, perhaps because of those qualities was mercilessly harassed, victimized, and driven to make one unguarded remark out of pure frustration, and fear that his block would inconvenience his fellow workers. He did little that could, in any human society, be considered troublesome. He did much to encourage disenchanted editors to renew their confidence in wikipedia as a project. Shameful, deeply shameful. For those who still read books, Melville's Billy Budd contains the moral.Nishidani (talk) 23:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thats a lie, this user was an idiot who stupidly expected that fair play and transparency should rule. He should have instead been coordinating his moves with like-minded editors, creating countless sockpuppets, and relying on "sources" that no reasonable person would call "reliable". He should have played the game, and you can bet he would have won if he had. nableezy - 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- Double standards rule wikipedia. CarolMooreDC (talk) 13:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
January 2010
After things calm down, I hope you reconsider your retirement. Although you and I have had differing viewpoints on some articles, I have always appreciated your input and contributions to article discussions. Regards, --nsaum75 02:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- I dont know, but thanks for the kind words and take care. nableezy - 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm bummed
Nothing more to say, really. You'll be missed. IronDuke 03:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. You get Sandstein to admit that his decision was retarded, and he has to use that word, Ill come back. nableezy - 17:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)