This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AaronS (talk | contribs) at 20:04, 14 September 2006 (→Your comments on WP:ANI). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:04, 14 September 2006 by AaronS (talk | contribs) (→Your comments on WP:ANI)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)AaronS has quit Misplaced Pages. It just don't work. |
This editor has decided to leave Misplaced Pages. |
Don't worry. I had my fun.
Vaya con Dios
I'm very sorry to see you go. Now you understand why I have kept away from the anarchism articles. There's a lot more that can be done here other than those, and the right folks, eventually, will probably perservere, so the best thing seems to be to make small edits to those at random intervals, rather than focusing completely on them. I suggest and ask that you take a Wikibreak, or try working on articles completely unrelated to anarchism. Like working on the collaboration of the week, or hitting Alt-X (random article) and finding something to spruce up. It'd be sad to lose you. Good luck. --Golbez 18:34, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Intangible
This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above. Intangible and AaronS are placed on probation and may be banned for appropriate periods from any article or set of articles which he disrupts by tendentious editing. Should any user placed on Probation under this ruling violate any ban imposed under this decision, they may be blocked for an appropriate period of time. Blocks are to be logged at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Intangible#Log of blocks and bans.
For the Arbitration Committee. - Mgm| 08:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Your comments on WP:ANI
Please see my comments on your post to the Administrators' Noticeboard at WP:ANI.
Incidentally, although our paths have never crossed before, I hope you won't quit spending a little time here. For what it's worth, there are places that are a little less contentious than anarchism ... you might want to hang out there for awhile. Best to you in any event. Newyorkbrad 18:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. I appreciate you taking the time to consider the matter.
- The way I see it, if we are going to keep bringing up my 3RR violations, then we should consider them as separate, and we should also consider the circumstances surrounding them. The first was inadvertent on my part, and I kindly asked the blocking administrator to lift the block, because I was currently editing New England extensively, working towards FA status. He did. The second was later admitted to be a hasty error on the part of the blocking administrator, who was also very reasonable. The third, by Woohookitty, is a bit up in the air. I contested it, and believe that Woohookitty admitted that he might have been in error, but I'm not quite sure at this point. Either way, in that case, I was reverting without edit warring, an exception to WP:3RR.
- Regardless, I do not have a history of tendentious editing. I rarely ever insert unsourced claims into controversial articles. Most of my edits have only been considered tendentious by a select group of highly ideological editors, some of whom are now banned indefinitely. As far as edit warring is concerned, I try as hard as possible to refrain from revert wars, and when I revert, it is usually without edit warring. My reasons are always promptly explained on the talk page of the article in question.
- Much of my involvement in Misplaced Pages's controversial articles (and my involvement with Misplaced Pages was not exclusive to them, although I took a certain interest in them) has been in conjunction with the involvement of a few other truly bad faith editors, who are now banned indefinitely (Thewolfstar, RJII, TheIndividualist, Hogeye, and their various proven or admitted sock puppets). Considering that I was editing controversial articles that were swamped with a few zealots, it follows that I often walked a thin line. I feel that I always walked that line in good faith and with the best interests of the encyclopaedia in mind.
- I pointed out my 3RR violations to the AN some time ago, asking for input. Many editors were sympathetic to my position. We all noted that, sometimes, administrators do not fully understand the context of a situation, especially where controversial articles are concerned, because they are too busy to take the time to do so. I'm very happy that Woohookitty has protected anarchism and taken a greater interest in it. It was only after hitting a brick wall a number of times that I decided that Misplaced Pages wasn't worth my time, anymore. --AaronS 20:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)