| Revision as of 03:28, 3 April 2018 editBeyond My Ken (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers263,279 edits →E-mail: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:32, 3 April 2018 edit undoCaptain Occam (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,011 edits →E-mailNext edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| I have no need of either correction nor advice from the like of you. You are '''''specifically''''' directed not to e-mail me again. If you do, I will take the matter directly to ArbCom. ] (]) 03:28, 3 April 2018 (UTC) | I have no need of either correction nor advice from the like of you. You are '''''specifically''''' directed not to e-mail me again. If you do, I will take the matter directly to ArbCom. ] (]) 03:28, 3 April 2018 (UTC) | ||
| :Well, I'm curious to see how that works out for you. --] (]) 03:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 03:32, 3 April 2018
 Archives |
Apology
In some comments I posted on various articles, which have now been administratively removed, I referred to you as a "creationist". In looking for the evidence I based this on, it now appears to me that I entirely misread it, and came to a completely wrong conclusion. Therefore, I apologize for calling you a creationist, and will attempt to be more accurate - both in general and concerning you - in the future. Yours, Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
- Instead of trying for what you post about me to be more accurate, I would rather you stop bringing me up in general. Is that option not on the table? --Captain Occam (talk) 21:31, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
- That's entirely up to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- No, it isn't. Please don't try to put your behavior off onto me. The only thing that controls whether you continue bringing me up is how much attention you choose to pay to me. --Captain Occam (talk) 02:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, but that simply isn't the case. You're not some innocent newbie being picked on for no good reason, you've been a disruptive element on Misplaced Pages for quite a while -- except, of course, for the period when you were site banned. If you do something that I see, and believe requires commenting on, I will do so. If you simply edit without causing trouble or disruption, you won't hear from me at all - so, you see, it's entirely your behavior which is the controlling factor. Don't worry, though, I won't say a thing to anyone about your apparent inability to graciously accept an apology when it's offered to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:12, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- How do you expect me to react to an apology that includes a built-in warning that you're going to continue talking about me and monitoring my edits? You've already told me in Jimbo's user talk that you're unable to assume good faith about any edit I make anywhere on the project. ("You used up your stock of AGF a long, long time ago.") Don't give me this story about my behavior being what determines the outcome--you've already told me point-blank that you're going to assume bad faith about my edits regardless of what I do.
- Sorry, but that simply isn't the case. You're not some innocent newbie being picked on for no good reason, you've been a disruptive element on Misplaced Pages for quite a while -- except, of course, for the period when you were site banned. If you do something that I see, and believe requires commenting on, I will do so. If you simply edit without causing trouble or disruption, you won't hear from me at all - so, you see, it's entirely your behavior which is the controlling factor. Don't worry, though, I won't say a thing to anyone about your apparent inability to graciously accept an apology when it's offered to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:12, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- No, it isn't. Please don't try to put your behavior off onto me. The only thing that controls whether you continue bringing me up is how much attention you choose to pay to me. --Captain Occam (talk) 02:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- That's entirely up to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:27, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
- Please understand that at this stage, I don't actually expect to change your attitude about this. But down the road, I would like to be able to show other people that I asked you nicely to stop trying to police my edits, and that you refused. --Captain Occam (talk) 04:03, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Captain Occam. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
I received an unsolicted e-mail from you, using Misplaced Pages's e-mail link.
I have no need of either correction nor advice from the like of you. You are specifically directed not to e-mail me again. If you do, I will take the matter directly to ArbCom. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:28, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
- Well, I'm curious to see how that works out for you. --Captain Occam (talk) 03:32, 3 April 2018 (UTC)