| Revision as of 17:20, 7 April 2010 edit207.237.230.164 (talk) →Topic goes here: can you read?← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:30, 7 April 2010 edit undo207.237.230.164 (talk) →Topic goes here: clarified topic titleNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == This is an RfC on BLP, nothing more. == | |||
| == Topic goes here == | |||
| Per , it seems plain that there are more issues being addressed here than have been laid out in this RfC. If Dc would like to address more issues than Ash's BLP contributions, they should be processed through the proper dispute resolution channels (i.e.: spelled out clearly in this Rfc, to start). Otherwise, this can be perceived as WikiHounding. ] (]) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC) | Per , it seems plain that there are more issues being addressed here than have been laid out in this RfC. If Dc would like to address more issues than Ash's BLP contributions, they should be processed through the proper dispute resolution channels (i.e.: spelled out clearly in this Rfc, to start). Otherwise, this can be perceived as WikiHounding. ] (]) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
| : Well, you can "perceive" in one hand...] (]) 14:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC) | : Well, you can "perceive" in one hand...] (]) 14:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:30, 7 April 2010
This is an RfC on BLP, nothing more.
Per Delicious carbuncle's comments here, it seems plain that there are more issues being addressed here than have been laid out in this RfC. If Dc would like to address more issues than Ash's BLP contributions, they should be processed through the proper dispute resolution channels (i.e.: spelled out clearly in this Rfc, to start). Otherwise, this can be perceived as WikiHounding. 207.237.230.164 (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Well, you can "perceive" in one hand...Bali ultimate (talk) 14:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- ...while giving the finger with the other? The outcome of this RfC will pertain to the issues addressed in the Statement of the Dispute, and nothing more. Should more changes be desired, they should be addressed directly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.230.164 (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Other having a troll deliberately misrepresenting what I've written, I don't see any cause for concern here. This RFC is about Ash's misuse of citations. The fact that I expect that there will eventually be an ARBCOM discussion relating to the topic area of gay pron performers and editors involved in it -- including me -- is immaterial. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Ash stated that you "accused (them) of being a fraud, liar and accusing others of homophobia. Characterizations such as "seeing Fred Phelps around every corner" are inflammatory, misrepresent my statements make me seem ridiculously hysterical."
- You replied: "For the record, you seem to be attributing to me comments I have not made, but all of it is better dealt with at the RFC." None of which is actually addressed in this RfC. Correct? Correct. So how, exactly, were you misrepresented? 207.237.230.164 (talk) 17:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- Other having a troll deliberately misrepresenting what I've written, I don't see any cause for concern here. This RFC is about Ash's misuse of citations. The fact that I expect that there will eventually be an ARBCOM discussion relating to the topic area of gay pron performers and editors involved in it -- including me -- is immaterial. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
- ...while giving the finger with the other? The outcome of this RfC will pertain to the issues addressed in the Statement of the Dispute, and nothing more. Should more changes be desired, they should be addressed directly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.230.164 (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2010 (UTC)