Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:32, 17 March 2006

User Talk

• Be sure to use article talk pages to discuss article changes.

cordial links to Oxford university

What a complete sham. i just noticed that Oxford graduate college page. Cordial links? Does that mean they have phoned up some of the profs in various departments at Oxford University? These universities are so pathetic in their transparent attempts to be linked to Universities with real standing. I am beginning to realise that there are many of these places in the US not just a few scattered examples. I'm amazed this sort of thing is legal and to think they are always crying persecution. Persecution? They have no idea at all, personally i'm surprised they have not been shut down and thrown in jail for fraud. Oh, by the way, good edits on that page and please excuse my rant. David D. (Talk) 22:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind the rant at all. It's good to see people feel the same way about education. Arbustoo 01:31, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

According to the school's webpage they have 100 students, been in existence since 1980, don't list tuition prices, and have no departments. Arbustoo 01:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Hyles etc.

I protected the page. Please work toward a consensus on the talk page; afterwards, any edits that contravene that consensus should allow you and the other agreeing editors to make judicious use of reporting any 3RR's. · Katefan0/poll 03:29, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I've also added it to my watchlist and will be interjecting ... er, guidance ... when needed ;) · Katefan0/poll 03:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help again. Arbustoo 03:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Your removal of Disputed Tag

Arbustoo, please do not remove the Disputed Tags from the Jack Hyles or First Baptist Church Wikis. As noted in the talk section of the Jack Hyles wiki, these articles are in dispute, hence the tag. Removing them is considered to be vandalism. --Teeja 13:10, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Even an Admin. removed the tag after you reinserted it. It will be removed if you cannot argue the grounds you put it in. See the talk pages for my response. Arbusto 19:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Hyles Anderson College

Ok, I'll take a look again, although I sort of lost track what was going on there. JoshuaZ 21:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Your fear of Jason Gastrich

I can't believe you just wrote the following in the Bob Cornuke entry:

"Remove Jason Gastrich's self promotion and revert changes he added without commentary"

What are you even trying to say? It sure looks like you're paranoid about this Gastrich fellow. Here is the information I added. Honestly. What's wrong with it?

"He also speaks at Bible conferences like Steeling the Mind, where he shows video footage and lectures about his travels and discoveries . In 2006, Cornuke is schedule to give a workshop at Louisiana Baptist University's graduation week; the same university where he earned his Ph.D. in 2005."

Except for the hot desire that burns deep in your loins against Gastrich, honestly, what's wrong with it? You were the one complaining about lack of citations for Cornuke speaking at Steeling the Mind . . . now you have them, and you complain that it's Gastrich's site. Did you forget to take your fucking medication? --Jack White1 08:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You need to get your sock puppets straight. Your "Jack White1" puppet didn't add your link. The "Jack White 1" puppet is over at the Kent Hovind article. Arbusto 08:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You need to stick to the topic and defend your sorry self. So what if I post from two different accounts? Where does Misplaced Pages say I can't do that? Now answer my question and don't think your boyfriends are helping you any. --Jack White1 23:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Interesting homophobic innuendo. David D. (Talk) 23:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You ask "Where does Misplaced Pages say I can't do that?" The answer is here. And for completeness, here is the bit where it says you should not make personal attacks, and here is where it says you should remain civil. HTH, HAND. Just zis Guy you know? 12:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

No this is interesting. You have Jason pretending to be someone who Jason confided his homosexuality to. The direct quote is "defaming him by pretending that person admitted to being GAY" (capitals as quoted). Arbusto 08:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Heh. Whoops...another Gastrich gaffe. Indeed, that was "Jumpstart My Heart" who added that link. You're absolutely right...must be hard to keep track of the socks when there are so many... - WarriorScribe 15:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You know Arbustoo, that "hot desire that burns deep in your loins against Gastrich" can be cleared up with a few antibiotics nowadays. --Malthusian (talk) 16:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

No one fears Gastrich. The problem is that everything he writes (or his socks write) is made up or propaganda. That goes for Cornuke too. This is an encylopedia and fairy stories are not welcome. David D. (Talk) 16:47, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Just so Jason Gastrich knows, whenever I see a sock puppet adding his webpage as a citation it will be removed. Arbusto 01:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

What the ???

Pages for Colleges and Schools frequently contain lists of notable graduates. If you are going to edit all of this out as useless "name dropping," then you have your work cut out for you! Why not start with West Point, then work your way to little places like the Pensacola Bible Institute.

I'd be interested to know if the most notable alumni from Pensacola BI is as notable as the least notable graduate from West Point. i have noticed a tendancy in the case of LBU that these alumni list grow fast. Thats fine if we are talking really notable but if not these alumni list s need to be kept short. Very short. David D. (Talk) 20:38, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Jason Gastrich, the day West Point and the Pensacola Bible Institute are recognized as having the same academics you can post that comment. Arbusto 00:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Some here have attacked LBU and their graduates and the list of LBU graduates. Therefore, in order to save face, appear to have Wiki's best interests in mind, and seem like well-adjusted, normal contributors, they have to try and screw up other entries to try and remain consistent. --Jack White1 23:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

In the section above you claimed you added a link to the Cornuke page. How? Your history and the page history shows someone else did it. There is a policy against sock puppets.Arbusto 00:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Have you any idea how unusual it is for a user RfC to gain 50 endorsements, or for an RfAr to be accepted 7/0/0 within days of its proposal? There is no significant dissent from the view that Gastrich, not Arbustoo, is the problem editor. Just zis Guy you know? 12:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

God loves you, Arbustoo

Arbustoo, God loves you, and I am praying for you personally and that He would solve this problem you seem to have with His Children. Just so you know, God usually answers my prayers in the affirmative. --68.78.118.244 01:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Please stop removing cited information. Arbusto 01:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

It would appear that God's children need to be protected from themselves or at least from their own ministers. Removing all the damning criticism about Hyle will not hide that point. David D. (Talk) 03:16, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

"Just so you know, God usually answers my prayers in the affirmative". Gastrich needs to start issuing C&C warnings, that sentence is my current personal highlight of the whole sorry affair. --Malthusian (talk) 12:39, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Puppet tag

Please don't put a puppet tag on my user page. I'm not a puppet.

You need to discuss why you're deleting the two links on Till's page. See you on the talk page. --Juicy Juicy 02:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Jason Gastrich, are you a little angry your links are removed? Arbusto 02:39, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Juicy Juicy asked you a valid question. Are you going to answer? You have been VERY hastily calling new users sockpuppets of Jason Gastrich. Why? Where is your evidence? Will you be repenting from this behavior? --Dragonfly02 23:39, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Why repent when he's been proven right ... time and time again? Justin Eiler 23:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

From what I've seen, he hasn't been proven right even once. Him thinking that all of these users are either "a Jason Gastrich sockpuppet or an impersonator" is completely conjecture. With your definition of proof, I just proved you were 10 feet tall. How? Cuz I said so. --Dragonfly02 23:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

And check Dragonfly's edits. It mays edits characteristically like Jason. Am I the only person who find this funny? JoshuaZ 01:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Your Request for Comment (RfC)

You're formally invited to come and respond to your RfC. --Juicy Juicy 03:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Just ignore it Abustoo, it will be a complete waste of time. David D. (Talk) 03:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

• Another vintage Gastrich tactic--an ill-advised attempt to use the mechanisms of Misplaced Pages as retaliation. - WarriorScribe 05:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

• Waste of time? Quite likely. Let's deal with it properly, though. Just zis Guy you know? 17:12, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

• Guy, as ever, our voice of reason. ;-) David D. (Talk) 18:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Juicy Juicy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has 11 posts. Arbusto 03:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

The page in question, Jason Gastrich, and homosexuality

The page Gastrich is particularly interested in has a unique background. As it turns out, he committed a felony by pretending to be Farrell Till and came out of closet with his sexuality while posing as Till via email. This shows the length and dishonesty that he does in the name of religion. It also shows a particular interest of POV pushing on that page. He later claimed it was a joke. Arbusto 03:26, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Funny, cuz what I see here is a guy making a mistake and saying he's sorry......AFTER Farrel Till was suspended from posting on Gastrich's internet forum, then returned under a fake name, got suspended, and returned under another fake name and was suspended, again. That's when Gastrich spoofed Till's email address and sent an email to Till's mail list. Not a felony by any stretch of the imagination, and perfectly reasonable given the circumstances.

Linking durangobill's web site and going on and on about Gastrich is only making you look worse; especially cuz you're avoiding your RfC. You better straighten up, or your time around here will be limited.....as limited as Gastrich's. --Joshua39215 06:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

So how do you expalin the facf that Gastrich kept denying he had forged the e-mail? Do those lies and deceit not count? That action was the precedent for many of your actions. As we see today you continue with deceit and thus your apology is worthless. David D. (Talk) 06:39, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

This is a cycle of abuse. Jason lies to attack someone, he says he is sorry. He lies again, says he's sorry. And again and again. And again, and a-- how many sock puppets should be sorry for? How many deceitful AfD's should he be sorry for? How many personal attacks should be sorry for? The answer is more than one and we haven't even seen one apology for his wiki-ways. Arbusto 08:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I think he is sorry he got caught, again. Although I feel now he is moving into his persecution phase. Could that be why these socks are so easy to find, he wants the all the trouble to wear as a badge of honor? David D. (Talk) 09:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

User:Joshua39215's first edit ever is on this page defending Gastrich. That begs several questions... Arbusto 07:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and it also repeats Gastrich's own whitewash of the incident, almost verbatim, which answers at least one of those questions, I think... - WarriorScribe 15:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

There is a good chance that Joshua39215, Jack White1 and juicy are actually Gastrich's meat puppet Uncley Davey. He posted in the Gastrich RfC and has a more permanent home at usenetpostsdotcom (talk · contribs). See the following discussion. i think that all meat puppets should be treated in the same way asGastrich sock puppets although I'm not sure there is a consensus for this? David D. (Talk) 22:03, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, we may want to add to the checkuser requests a note about comparing the various puppets to Davy also. 22:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC) JoshuaZ 22:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Bugger. I thought we'd converted him. --Malthusian (talk) 12:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I thought so too, but we need to consider the possibility that we haven't. I added an appropriate note to that effect on the checkuser page. JoshuaZ 14:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

It is NOT me, thank you very much. Please see my rebuttal. You will note that Dr Day has also graciously accepted he was wrong, although he has not amended his comments here, which is a bit disappointing. You have not "converted" me in any theological sense, Malthusian, and you have not changed my mind with regards to Misplaced Pages as it was NEVER my intention to be anything other than a good Wikipedian in the first place. What you guys did - I am grateful to you for it, don't get me wrong - was to expain how things work around here. It was never my intention to work against the status quo wittingly. Having said that, you go ahead and do your userchecks with my blessing. I have nothing to hide and your minds will be set at rest. Hopefully after that in the future you will not have an assumption of bad will towards me in the future, just because I happen to count Jason among my friends. Uncle Davey (Talk) 12:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Good. --Malthusian (talk) 12:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Please note that, the RfC having failed to attract the required number of (provably different) endorsements, it has now been struck out. Just zis Guy you know? 16:26, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Should the talk page get deleted too? Arbusto 19:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

The Ruckmen

Good god, these Ruckman articles are Gastrich all over again. Deja vu.  ·  rodii  ·  04:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I support what you're doing, but I will say that I don't think you should be marking your reverts as minor. Many people hide minor edits on their watchlists, and the effect is to hide controversial edits from them. It might make you look sneaky.  ·  rodii  ·  04:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer, I'll use that feature more carefully. Arbusto 04:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Reconciliation

Hi Arbusto,

I hope you're well.

I'm writing a couple of Wiki users because I feel that I may have offended some people. I apologize if my past contributions made you upset. I see that you value making contributions to Misplaced Pages (although I don't agree with them) and that you have a passion for this place and getting your input into various entries.

The recent explosion in revert wars by "apparent Jason Gastrich sock puppets or impersonators" has not been my doing. Although I disagree with your viewpoint that a link to one of my web pages or a link that I agree with should be discussed on the talk page first, in fact I find this downright unfair and wrong, I haven't been contributing under the huge number of impersonators we have seen, lately.

Please consider reconciling with me. It could do us some good. I wish had something tangible to offer you, but I don't. All I can do is apologize for the past edits that were deemed inappropriate by you, although I still strongly disagree, and forgive you for the misdeeds I feel you have done. For what it's worth, I see this place as hostile to what I believe in, and even the truth in general, causing me to have serious reservations about even inviting others here and certainly about promoting this place in any way.

My most important goal is to glorify God and to lead others into a relationship with Him. I've been working hard and doing this online, although some may not see these efforts reflected on Misplaced Pages. Therefore, I need to go where I'm needed the most, because that is where the fruit is at.

Thanks for your consideration and God bless you.

Sincerely, Jason Gastrich 01:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Please don't be offended that I'm sending a similar message to a handful of others. I feel the same way and wanted to say the same thing to them, too.

Firstly, I flat out don't believe that you haven't been using sock puppets lately. Your integrity, as far as I am concerned, is so deeply tarnished that it will take a long while to remedy that to give you the benefit of the doubt. By the way, you openly admitted to sending an army of sock puppets on your talk with "don't expect to be hearing from me, but expect to be hearing from them."

I think the CheckUser is good proof of what I've been saying and you could continue doing more CheckUsers if you like.

I didn't openly admit to sending an army of sockpuppets. You misunderstood what I was saying. I was anticipating that like-minded Christians would come and contribute to articles that were important to the Christian community; partly due to their importance and partly due to the way the entries were being treated.

Secondly, don't you dare claim you are trying to "glorify God" by reverting edits about accreditation on the LBU page, removing quotes from the SAB, removing content from diploma mill experts, ect. Those edits were POV to make YOUR "degree" and your ego more publicly acceptable. You aren't leading others "into a relationship with" God by reverting cited edits of Cornuke's deceit.

As JzG admitted, I made a number of good and valid contributions in areas that were lacking. I don't expect for you to admit the same. However, I did a lot to try and improve the LBU page and some of my work was removed for no good reason and replaced with absurd accusations. Even now, as the article stands, there are a number of incorrect things and absent things that should be there. Too bad for you, the entry, the community, and those who trust it. I don't and more and more others don't, too.

Thirdly, no doubt you feel this place is hostile because you put edits on pages to promote stuff you are selling. It's too bad you equate believers with those who will stand by as you spam articles and you equate disbelievers with those who remove your POV and spam.

No, this place has more people who disagree with so-called "fundamentalist Christianity" than those who do. This place has more administrators that disagree with so-called "fundamentalist Christianity" as well. In fact, JzG says he is against it in a private email that I received. If you can't see how this place is an armpit for factual information and a haven for sensational claims, then go ahead and keep contributing like you do.

I'm not about making money. If I was, I wouldn't be in Christian ministry. Uncle Davey has repeatedly articulated this on Usenet and he's quite right. I could make far more dollars doing other things, but I choose to invest in others because God loves me and I love Him and others. However, I do find that I can fulfill His mission for me and my ministry better off Misplaced Pages than on it.

Lastly, if you are truly sorry then simply stop with the bad behavior and self-promotion. I'd rather see that then get a hollow apology. Yet, its too late for that according to RfA. You have no choice, but to cease and desist your behavior-- the behavior that you have known to be contrary to wikipedia spirit. Arbusto 01:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I already have. I'm not a serious contributor to Misplaced Pages, because we all know I disagree with the "Wikipedian spirit" as it disagrees with the Spirit of God. The Wikipedian spirit knows no grace or truth. It's all about majoring on the minors, writing pages about insignificant blemishes, while omitting important and relevant facts that might paint Jesus Christ, His religion, and His people in a positive light.

Now, don't forget that I came and apologized to you and sought reconciliation. You took this opportunity to lay into me, so I defended myself and told you about how I felt on certain issues. Even though this conversation has evolved, don't forget why I came here and what I said to you. I do not excuse poor behavior, from myself, from you, or anyone else. However, I do not admit to things I haven't done and I do know that among my many contributions, I have tried to be a positive contributor to the community, and some have agreed.

I'm more interested in repairing relationships than trying to sway an RfA or RfC. Besides, I'm not even here posting any more. Why would it matter to me if I were banned? My morals aren't guided by consequences. They are guided by God's Spirit, so that's why I have apologized to you and a few others for past behavior that made some upset. --Jason Gastrich 02:48, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Fine. Arbusto 03:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

"Over the past 4-6 weeks, the Holy Spirit has continually reminded of the scriptures that command Christians to avoid being unequally yoked with unbelievers. Of course, they aren't just referring to marriage, but to relationships. In the coming days, I'll be writing some articles on the problems with Misplaced Pages, but for now, I'd like Christians to consider how working closely with unbelievers to create entries on Misplaced Pages could be considered being unequally yoked." Gastrich wrote that, but I guess the "Holy Spirit" changed his mind. I submit, however, that this is less an attempt at reconciliation, and more an attempt at damage control...an attempt that is too little and too late. - WarriorScribe 03:07, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Arbusto, I really think you should take this at face value. There is credible evidence that somebody has been impersonating Jason; I would be the last person to suggest he is whiter than white, but I think he has realised that the battle he appeared to be trying to fight is one he cannot win. I would be happy with the original remedies proposed by ArbCom, namely restriction from editing certain articles and rapid escalation in case of future infractions. Just zis Guy you know? 09:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I completely disagree. For one he says NOT A SINGLE SOCK PUPPET IS HIS. (1) Then he went on to accuse warriorscribe and myself of being the same person. In which he denies he requested the check user. When I first began editting the LBU pages he accused myself of being a sock puppet then and has always had his dellusional suspicions. Who else would have done that or known he has done that? (2) As for the false RfC that was done a few days after two LBU related pages were deleted per AfD, which was done by the same account that requested the check user. (3) So the Turkmen account was just a new user who accidently inserted a hollow domain that linked to Jason's webpage/ministry? (4) So the revived "Steeling the mind" articles was a Gastrich impersonator who just happened to have the article saved on his computer before the deletion. Also, you think the Jason is truly sorry for his actions? Then why hasn't he copied and pasted the same message to Warriorscribe? Lastly, he openly said he doesn't care about the consquences of not obeying the wikipedia rules right above. Doesn't sound at all like an apology. Arbusto 19:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

With regard to WarriorScribe, the reason he did not post on his page, or mine for that matter, is that he knows full well he knows his history. David D. (Talk) 19:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Stop Vandalism

Arbustoo: STOP Vandalizing Wiki Pages! Drichardson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Fourth edit ever on wikipedia and its on my talk page. You get a Jason Gastrich sock puppet tag. Arbusto 02:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Vandal, yes. Gastrich? I'm not too sure. Harvestdancer 16:08, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

No, no, you have it all wrong - we are standing in the way of Misplaced Pages's true purpose: righting the injustices caused by the US Government's evil accreditation scam, which falsely paints excellent institutions as degree mills just because they are staffed solely by their own alumni, offer no courses acceptable to any other institution and sell you degrees or give credit for buying the Principal's books. Just zis Guy you know? 08:02, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Did you see this one yet? Do these people really want graduates of Bronte International University's medical school to operate on them? Or should there be an group that approves schools to make sure people really are getting the education they claim? Arbusto 08:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Arbustoo, You are Vandalizing Wiki Pages!

Arbustoo, you are vandalizing pages, not using proper English grammar, and intentionally misrepresenting others. If you cannot speak fluent English, do not edit English pages. If you are not an expert on a subject, do not edit a page.Jreichard (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

First and only ever edit on my talk page. You get a Jason Gastrich sock puppet tag. Arbusto 03:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Not Gastrich, probably PSRuckman (talk · contribs) (see his talk page). Just zis Guy you know? 15:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Maybe not, but made within minutes of Gastrich's other posts and when I made some edits on the AfR that he doesn't agree with. Arbusto 19:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes Ruckman is out to get everyone. He is everyone and is everywhere! Sorry about that Jreichard. But I am with you re Arbusto/o's spelling. Fantastic that he is out to protect the world from "fake" doctorates, isn't it? Yep, with defenders like that, who needs enemies? PSRuckman

Thus spake the man who loudly "corrected" my perfectly valid British English spelling. Hoist by your own petard, Ruckman. Just zis Guy you know? 10:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Do you use sockpuppets?

Hi Arbusto,

I hope you're well.

I noticed that someone has requested a check user for your account and User:WarriorScribe. They think you're the same person and I must admit that they make a pretty good case.

How do you respond to this? I'm not making any judgments or assumptions, so that's why I asked you directly.

Take care, --Jason Gastrich 02:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Jason we all know that was you as a sock puppet who requested a check user and started the RfC. I have never posted/used in any way, shape or form another wikipedia account. That is to say, I am not nor have ever met, used or been affliated in any way to Warriorscribe. Your games get old. Arbusto 03:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, it was clearly a Gastrich sock puppet--one that did not answer my challenge about this very issue...I couldn't help but notice that. Regardless, this isn't the first time that Gastrich has engaged in the use of socks and false identities to pretend that "someone" initiated an action or wrote something that, in fact, was initiated or written by him, and that he later would claim is a "pretty good case." - WarriorScribe 03:28, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I strongly suggest that this section be added directly to the arbcomm evidence since his comment here undermines Jason's claim that the current sockpuppets aren't his. JoshuaZ 03:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, it does. After all, does Gastrich really expect us to believe that he just happened to notice a checkuser request that had, in fact, been removed, so that he had to reference it the way that he did in the comments above? No, he knew it was there, all along, because he put it there; and when it was removed, he needed to bring it out, again. It's not the first time that sort of thing has happened. Quite amusing, of course, but it does seem that he digs himself that well-known "deeper hole." - WarriorScribe 03:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I added a more telling quote from above about getting blocked for poor behavior. Jason Gastrich wrote, "Why would it matter to me if I were banned? My morals aren't guided by consequences." Arbusto 03:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, under his "once-saved, always-saved" theology, Gastrich can pretty much do anything because he'll get forgiven for it, later. This would explain his fairly extensive hostility both here and in Usenet before he knew anything about Misplaced Pages, and also why he feels that he needs to follow no rules but his own (not to mention his selective following of Scripture). - WarriorScribe 03:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but this has the added benefit of demonstrating direct collusion between Gastrich and the current sockpuppets. Remember that a few people suggested that some of the current socks might actually be John. Gastrich's comment here makes that very hard to believe. Also, I think the quote you have here is slightly out of context considering the next sentence after it where Gastrich talks about following the will of his deity. JoshuaZ 03:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I recall that, yes...so that's a fair point, even if I disagree that "Bible John" really had much, if anything, to do with the wave of Gastrich socks and suspected socks. I've seen him in action enough to know that he would have given himself away long before now.

I understand the comments about how Gastrich presumes to follow the "will of his deity," but that's just talk, by my observation. Gastrich makes a lot of that sort of noise, but in the end, there's little evidence for it, especially in light of the fact that, as I said, he tends to ignore much of what that deity is alleged to have said or required of his followers. - WarriorScribe 03:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

It's not out context because he has decided what the will of God is and has repeatedly noted his edits are for that will/God. Arbusto 03:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, ok true. I still think however that the above comment by Gastrich really does sink any last claim Gastrich could make that the sockpuppets were someone else. JoshuaZ 04:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you're right. - WarriorScribe 04:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, the will of MY deity is to slaughter my enemies, see them driven before me and hear the lamentations of their women.  RasputinAXP  c 15:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that's some deity. Mine got nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be if everyone was nice to each other for a change. Just zis Guy you know? 10:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Cool it, guys. Also, Arbustoo, Commander Cool, part deux (talk · contribs) is not a Gastrich sock. Look at the edit history and see also Commander Cool (talk · contribs). Just zis Guy you know? 15:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Gastrich misses our attention. Pretty pathetic, eh? - WarriorScribe 05:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi Arbustoo, I hate to seem overly critical, but I think you need to look at your use of the 'minor edit' function. Minor edits are only for typo fixes & formatting. Don't mark it as minor if you have added or deleted any info, and especially don't use it is you've done a revert. See Minor edit & WP:REVERT. Otherwise, keep up the good work! Ashmoo 07:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Arbusto 18:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thanks, a great deal. I look forward to Arbusto/o giving this better attention. Don't know why JzG and JoshuaZ never noticed. They can be such sticklers for rules! PSRuckman

Simple: once somebody has established a reputation as a reasonably neutral editor with a good grip of the ruiles you tend not to watch their every move. Nobody is above scrutiny, but neither is anybody required to critique every action by every editor. As far as I'm aware Arbustoo has never "corrected" perfectly correct British English spelling - people living in glass houses should not throw stones. Just zis Guy you know? 10:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, different people have different issues they put emphasis on. In Ashmoo's case, he apparently cares about the rules for marking minor edits. (Actually, until I saw this I didn't know that reverts shouldn't be marked minor either for that matter). Don't assume bad faith just because you disagree with people. JoshuaZ 18:31, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Visible School

I saw your message to JzG on Oxford Graduate School. Be very afraid...there is worse lurking in the list of TRACS candidate schools. Behold Visible School. It's Rock'n'Roll High School University...for Jesus! :) (No article here yet, thank goodness.) · rodii · 02:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hyles-Anderson

Vanity bolding? No, that's harsh. Teeja was just drawing attention to something. WP:AGF, eh? Even when someone does appear to have an agenda. Just zis Guy you know? 10:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

UofN Accreditation

Thank you for your comments on UofN accreditation. No I am not trying to mislead anybody about the school's accreditation, but rather trying to follow the normal paradigm for university entries. You have been stating that University of the Nations is unaccredited in the first descriptive line for the Wiki entry. If you continue to do this, it will continually be deleted. If you would like to comment on a university's accreditation, I suggest that you do this in the section titled "accreditation", following the example of countless university entries throughout Misplaced Pages.

Secondly, your statement that the UofN is not accredited in the United States is true. However, as it is an international university offering courses around the world (and as its international provost office is in Switzerland, its transcripts and records office is in the UK) a far more relevant statement would of an international nature. I have updated it with a full and internationalized explanation.

Lastly, I have once again added the link for UofN Kona as this is the most important branch of the UofN. Please stop removing it as it is highly relevant information. Thank you.