| Revision as of 18:38, 31 October 2005 editMatt Crypto (talk | contribs)23,089 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:55, 31 October 2005 edit undoSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| :Yes, and he did it because Amalekite, ], posted the list of (perceived) Jewish editors to Stormfront, which is what Homeontherange referred to in his block summary. As did I four days later, when you unblocked him without discussing it with the blocking admin. So please stop, once and for all, claiming that he was blocked solely for his views. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 18:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC) | :Yes, and he did it because Amalekite, ], posted the list of (perceived) Jewish editors to Stormfront, which is what Homeontherange referred to in his block summary. As did I four days later, when you unblocked him without discussing it with the blocking admin. So please stop, once and for all, claiming that he was blocked solely for his views. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 18:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :: I'm afraid that's how I judged it happened. I've gone back and looked at User:Homeontherange's posts on the mailing list, and I'm still convinced that the rationale about "personal attacks which put users in danger" was only brought in later, and it seemed very much to me to be a convenient afterthought retroactively justifying the block. Homeontherange only ever justified his or her block on the grounds that Amalekite was inciting a mass Neo-Nazi POV pushing project. Anyway, I'm sick of this issue and angry at the behaviour of some Wikipedians; this is utterly unproductive and destructive, and so I am quite happy to stop claiming anything about it whatsoever and head back to cryptography editing. ] 18:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC) | :: I'm afraid that's how I judged it happened. I've gone back and looked at User:Homeontherange's posts on the mailing list, and I'm still convinced that the rationale about "personal attacks which put users in danger" was only brought in later, and it seemed very much to me to be a convenient afterthought retroactively justifying the block. Homeontherange only ever justified his or her block on the grounds that Amalekite was inciting a mass Neo-Nazi POV pushing project. Anyway, I'm sick of this issue and angry at the behaviour of some Wikipedians; this is utterly unproductive and destructive, and so I am quite happy to stop claiming anything about it whatsoever and head back to cryptography editing. ] 18:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :::It isn't fair to pop up accusing other admins of acting in bad faith, then decide to retreat to crypotography when they defend themselves. ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 18:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:55, 31 October 2005
Perhaps we should take this to a talk page (although this debate is getting far too poisonous, and I will probably renew my previous vow to forget about it this ugly mess permanently), but I should point out that you were not the first admin to block Amalekite. User:Homeontherange blocked him four days before you, and gave the edit summary I quoted above. — Matt Crypto 18:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, and he did it because Amalekite, Alex Linder, posted the list of (perceived) Jewish editors to Stormfront, which is what Homeontherange referred to in his block summary. As did I four days later, when you unblocked him without discussing it with the blocking admin. So please stop, once and for all, claiming that he was blocked solely for his views. SlimVirgin 18:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that's how I judged it happened. I've gone back and looked at User:Homeontherange's posts on the mailing list, and I'm still convinced that the rationale about "personal attacks which put users in danger" was only brought in later, and it seemed very much to me to be a convenient afterthought retroactively justifying the block. Homeontherange only ever justified his or her block on the grounds that Amalekite was inciting a mass Neo-Nazi POV pushing project. Anyway, I'm sick of this issue and angry at the behaviour of some Wikipedians; this is utterly unproductive and destructive, and so I am quite happy to stop claiming anything about it whatsoever and head back to cryptography editing. — Matt Crypto 18:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- It isn't fair to pop up accusing other admins of acting in bad faith, then decide to retreat to crypotography when they defend themselves. SlimVirgin 18:55, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that's how I judged it happened. I've gone back and looked at User:Homeontherange's posts on the mailing list, and I'm still convinced that the rationale about "personal attacks which put users in danger" was only brought in later, and it seemed very much to me to be a convenient afterthought retroactively justifying the block. Homeontherange only ever justified his or her block on the grounds that Amalekite was inciting a mass Neo-Nazi POV pushing project. Anyway, I'm sick of this issue and angry at the behaviour of some Wikipedians; this is utterly unproductive and destructive, and so I am quite happy to stop claiming anything about it whatsoever and head back to cryptography editing. — Matt Crypto 18:38, 31 October 2005 (UTC)