This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Davidpdx (talk | contribs) at 06:22, 7 November 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I changed my user name from Samspade to SamuelSpade as it was brought to my attention there was another user that already had SamSpade with Spade capitalized. This should clear my identiy in the future. Sorry for any confusion.SamuelSpade 18:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Bokak Atoll Consensus Issue

Please do not revert the Bokak Atoll article. There is no consensus, which is what is being worked on on the DOM page. Davidpdx 07:05, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

In terms of how consensus is defined on Misplaced Pages, that has not been reached. Also I have asked countless times to see the SBS clip and you have yet to produce it. The proof of a master sovereign lease over Taongi (aka Bokak Atoll) has not been shown. Misplaced Pages has certain rules regarding proof.

I urge you to check out the following links regarding policies on using sources on Misplaced Pages:

Misplaced Pages:Cite sources Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources Misplaced Pages:No original research Misplaced Pages:Verifiability

In terms of this article being reverted, if it is it will be deemed vandalism and reported. Davidpdx 04:01, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Response to message left on my talk page

The truth is there is NO consensus. Because the two of you claim this trash is true, doesn't not make it so. It is absolutely ridiclous to claim consensus. I have posted on BOTH your your talk pages about consensus on Misplaced Pages and neither one of you seem to care about it. I will continue to revert the page back to the one that was last agreed upon and report all reverts by both you as vandalism. If you want a revert war, simply bring it on. It is not only myself that disagrees with what you are posting, there are others who have made comments on the DOM page regarding the lack of proof you base your article on. I will be posting this on both of your talk pages in order to make sure you see this message. Davidpdx 11:04, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

The reason why I'm being mean is because almost all of your contributions are to add DOM-related content to articles; your account only came in to existance around during edit wars on whether or not to add DOM consensus. The evidence shows that, beyond a reasonable doubt, you are a new account set up to make it artificially appear that multiple people want DOM content on Misplaced Pages when, in reality, only one person does. This is very dishonest and goes against my sense of morality; hence the hostility. Samboy 06:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

My contributions before changing from Sam to Samuel

This is my history before changing Sam to Samuel: http://en.wikipedia.org/Special:Contributions/Samspade SamuelSpade 03:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC) SamuelSpade 03:21, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Put up or shut up response

Your passive agressive behavior is noted. It's strange when one of you disappear, the other one suddenly shows up. Then suddenly new sockpuppets appear. There is in fact proof that you have constantly reverted articles against consensus, exactly in the same manner as Johnski. Putting the sockpuppet issue aside for a moment, that is still inappropriate. Although you have not done it near as much as other "user id's" it is still inexcusable. Like Johnski, et. al., you have not shown good faith when you revert articles without consensus. That is exactly why this is going forward in terms of arbitration. I would say the same back to you, "put up or shut up!" Davidpdx 06:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)