| Revision as of 22:19, 26 January 2006 editMcNeight (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,573 editsm Added new sock puppet of Braaad; T`sitra Yel Darb← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:53, 27 January 2006 edit undo68.115.72.93 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| YOU SUCK!! | |||
| In order to remain listed at ], at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the ''same'' dispute with a ''single'' user, not different disputes or multiple users. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 23:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: <tt>{{CURRENTTIME}}, {{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC)</tt>. | |||
| ---- | |||
| *(] | ] | ]) | |||
| *(] | ] | ]) | |||
| *(] | ] | ]) | |||
| ---- | |||
| ''Users should only edit one summary or view, other than to endorse.'' | |||
| ==Statement of the dispute== | |||
| ''This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections ("Response" or "Outside views") should not edit the "Statement of the dispute" section.'' | |||
| === Description === | |||
| User first edit was on 30 October 2005, which was an attempt to enter incorrect information into the entry for ] about what the ] ] award is equivalent to . Editor ] reverted this edit on 6 November 2005 with the edit sumary reading ''"Corrected mistake. The military considers the Mitchell, not the Spaatz, to be the Eagle equivalent. Check with your recruiter."'' | |||
| User again attempted to enter the same information on 10 November 2005 , and was reverted by editor ] on 14 November 2005 with the edit summary reading ''"rv back; sorry guys. The Mitchell is the Eagle equivilant and you need to have the FO graphics before you change those grades around"'' | |||
| User again attemped to enter the same information on 17 November 2005 , and was reverted by editor ] on 18 November 2005 with the edit summary reading ''"rv; please see talk page."'' | |||
| At this point, user decided to enter the discussion assuming that they were right, believing that the edits were made in bad faith. The user also attempted to "throw their weight around" by announcing their claimed status within Civil Air Patrol and how they must be right ''"I have been a member of CAP for over 18 years and the Commander of a CAP Cadet Squadron for many of them and I can assure you that I am correct in my facts!!! Please do not change it back!!! Thank you!!"'' | |||
| After attempts by ] to obtain supporting documentation from this user, I entered the discussion on 29 November 2005 by reformatting the talk page and adding my contribution . I was immediately insulted by the following remarks ''"Keep your personal comments to yourself. I called--did you?? {If you would like to investigate this matter further please contact CAP Nat'l HQ Cadet Program at (334) 953-7568 or via eMail at keasterling@capnhq.gov"'' | |||
| ] now intervened as an administrator, with a message on my talk page about "Bullying from ]" stating ''"If Braaad continues to try to push you around, please let me know on my user talk page. I do not care if he (or she) is correct, because I want what is correct to be placed in the article. However, he or she has absolutely no right to try to tell you to keep your comments to yourself."'' . After receiving warnings from ] about his threatening tone, I attempted to prove just how wrong the user was once and for all . | |||
| After this, the user reverts to edit warring, deletion of previous comments he has made as well as warnings left by administrators, and verbal harrassment both on the ] page (though the complete discussion is archived at ]) as well as various user talk pages including ], ], ], ] and ]. | |||
| User has had his edits reverted by the following editors: | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] (see message on ]) | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| Among the users many grand claims are that: | |||
| * Claims his name is Major Roger Healey , although either intentionally or by chance this is also the name of a major character from ] (played by ]) | |||
| * Claims to currently be a Major in the Civil Air Patrol, then later admits that "I don't wear a uniform any more---I feel it is just a substitute for real authority" | |||
| * Claims to be Commander of a Civil Air Patrol squadron , in spite of claim above | |||
| * Claims to have an IQ of 153 and be ''"a bitter old man with nothing to fill my life with but this kind of petty nonsense"'' , although arguements tend to take on the same tone as that of an 8 year old | |||
| * Claims his user talk page is his and all edits on it are "vandalism" or "illegal" | |||
| === Evidence of disputed behavior === | |||
| (Provide diffs. Links to entire articles aren't helpful unless the editor created the entire article. Edit histories also aren't helpful as they change as new edits are performed.) | |||
| #]: , , , , , , , , , | |||
| #]: | |||
| #]: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | |||
| #]: , , , | |||
| === Applicable policies === | |||
| {list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct} | |||
| :# ] | |||
| :# ] | |||
| :# ] | |||
| :# ] | |||
| :# ] | |||
| === Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute === | |||
| (provide diffs and links) | |||
| #]: , | |||
| #]: , | |||
| #]: | |||
| === Users certifying the basis for this dispute === | |||
| ''{Users who tried and failed to resolve the dispute}'' | |||
| <!-- Please note: If you did not try and fail to resolve the dispute, but agree with the summary's presentation of events, please sign in the next section. Please notify the user, via his talk page, that a conduct dispute has been raised. --> | |||
| (sign with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) | |||
| :# ] 23:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :# ] 08:23, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :# ] (that's ] to you) 22:02, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| === Other users who endorse this summary === | |||
| <!-- If you agree with the summary's presentation of events but did not try and fail to resolve the dispute, please sign in this section. --> | |||
| (sign with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) | |||
| :# | |||
| :# | |||
| ==Response== | |||
| ''This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete. Users signing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Outside Views") should not edit the "Response" section.'' | |||
| '' | |||
| {Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.} | |||
| Users who endorse this summary (sign with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>): | |||
| # | |||
| I have just seen MORE of McNeight's attacks against me---and I feel that I should just quit visiting Misplaced Pages at all. PLEASE cease and desist from sending me any more new messages; I won't respond if nobody posts anything about me. Now that is a great deal for everybody---what do you say?? Actually---don't say anything and I will just disappear. No comments, no sock puppets, no hassles; you just stop posting anything to this page and you will NEVER hear from me again. The fact the McNeight has taken SO much time to vadalize my posts and then write up pages of complaints is rather frieghtening to me. I don't want or need to be harassed in this fashion. ] 14:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| It's been MORE than 48 hours and I still see this page---what's that about?? ] 14:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC) QUOTE: If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 23:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is: <tt>{{CURRENTTIME}}, {{CURRENTDAY}} {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC)</tt>. | |||
| McNeight CLEARLY bears a personal and perhaps DANGEROUS grudge against me for not bowing down to his perceived superiority. I am still waiting for the resolution of this -RFC- will I be put in the stocks?? Or will McNeighjt just keep find ways to delete my user page---I susupect he is a sock puppet of ] and ] Thank you all for your kindness and generosity! ] 14:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC) aka 68.112.201.90 | |||
| ==Outside view== | |||
| ''This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute. Users editing other sections ("Statement of the dispute" and "Response") should not edit the "Outside Views" section, except to endorse an outside view.'' | |||
| {Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.} | |||
| Users who endorse this summary (sign with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>): | |||
| # | |||
| ===Outside View by user:OnceBitten=== | |||
| As an objective bystander in this matter, and having read the various comments, I really do not believe that ] has an understanding of this process, the opportunity it presents for him to address the concerns and work towards a solution. User:Braad's most recent addition to this process demanding that the page be deleted, and his reasoning behind the demand indicate simply validate his contested behavior. ] 22:56, 21 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| **Actually---all I want deleted are the obnoxious taglines that McNeight added to MY posts!! <small>—''preceding ] comment by'' ] (] • ]). <big> The POLICY of Misplaced Pages does NOT require anyone to sign their posts!! In a democratic society one shouldn't be FORCED to comply to the whims of anyone---even the majority!! The rules are on my side and the fact that his -cry for help- has been largely ignored by everyone seems to tell me that he IS actually the one breaking the vandalism rules by adding something that HE thinks is required to MY posts!! ] 09:56, 23 December 2005 (UTC) aka 68.112.201.90 (That's right I have a sock puppet---which is also NOT against any POLICY!!!) As McNeight put it, I may be a "loud-mouthed bully" but he is extremely and perhaps dangerously, obsessed with having things HIS way!! Kind of seems like the 8-year old he claimed I was!!! Shockingly rude!! | |||
| Ya know---if you REALLY read this diatribe two things become clear: I was a rude fool and McNeight is dangerously obsessed with me. I am concerned about his ] of me and hope he isn't violent or in need of any psychotropic medication. ] 16:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC) <small>—''preceding ] comment by'' ] (] • ]). <big> | |||
| ==Discussion== | |||
| ''All'' signed comments and talk not related to an endorsement should be directed to ]. Discussion should not be added below. Discussion should be posted on the talk page. Threaded replies to another user's vote, endorsement, evidence, response, or comment should be posted to the talk page. | |||
Revision as of 16:53, 27 January 2006
YOU SUCK!!