Spamming the list replying in a different thread? David http://www.davidhowellstudios.com
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Delongchamp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hey group, > > The results are back from Mmeiser's proposed Wikipedia ban of pdelongchamp. > See what each Wikipedia Administrator had to say about it: > > "I fail to see why there should be any consideration of a ban. Unreferenced > material is not welcome on Wikipedia." > - EdJohnston 23:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC) > > "Agreed. The argument for a ban reads exactly like 'this person won't let me > put original research in the article and this is unfair'" > -Amarkov moo! 00:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > "Agreed as well. I don't see a bit of misbehavior here, let alone anything > that calls for a ban. We do not accept unverifiable material or original > research, period, and I'll happily buy a beer for anyone that upholds that." > -Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > "Is it just me, and I don't mean to sound bad faith here, or isn't > User:MichaelVerdi very knowldgable about this situation for a user with an > 11 hour old account? Maybe they editted the pages as an IP? Its just weird > that User:MichaelVerdi is the only one supporting Michael Meiser's > suggestion. I hope they're aware of WP:MEAT. Apologies if I'm wrongheaded > here" > -Cailil talk 00:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > "This is almost nothing but an attack. Close, and archive. I'm going to go > ahead and call a spade a spade, and point out that the poster of this > complaint has failed to assume good fiath." > â"Eagle101 Need help? 07:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > "See no reason for a ban. This is retaliation to the post above. Archive and > suggest they cool down and sort this issue out via dispute resolution." > -Kzrulzuall Talk⢠Contribs 07:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > Read the full proposed ban here: http://tinyurl.com/2gnhld > > > I hope that we can put the issue to rest and consider that perhaps there's a > possibility that I perchance might have perhaps been trying to improve the > article and not the other way around. > > > > and now ladies and gentlemen, ...your moment of zen. (please accept this as > humour with only a tinge of bitterness) > > "This user - Pdelongchamp - constantly fucks with the entry. [...] It's > pathetic. I can't believe Meiser still has the patience to try work on the > article as his changes usually get deleted within hours." > -Michael Verdi > > > > On 5/3/07, pdelongchamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hey group, > > The results of the Mmeiserââ¬â¢s Wikipedia ban are here. See what > > each Wikipedia Administrator had to say about it: > > > > ââ¬Å"I fail to see why there should be any consideration of a ban. > > Unreferenced material is not welcome on Wikipedia.ââ¬Â > > - EdJohnston <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:EdJohnston> 23:56, 2 > > May 2007 (UTC) > > > > ââ¬Å"Agreed. The argument for a ban reads exactly like ââ¬Ëthis > > person won't let me put original research in the article and this is > > unfairââ¬â¢Ã¢â¬Â > > -Amarkov <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Amarkov> moo! > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Amarkov> 00:11, 3 May 2007 > > (UTC) > > > > ââ¬Å"Agreed as well. I don't see a bit of misbehavior here, let > > alone anything that calls for a ban. We do not accept unverifiable > > material or original research, period, and I'll happily buy a beer for > > anyone that upholds that.ââ¬Â > > - Seraphimblade <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Seraphimblade> Talk > > to me <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Seraphimblade> 00:13, 3 > > May 2007 (UTC) > > > > ââ¬Å"Is it just me, and I don't mean to sound bad faith here, or > > isn't User:MichaelVerdi <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MichaelVerdi> > > very knowldgable about this situation for a user with an 11 hour old > > account? Maybe they editted the pages as an IP? Its just weird that > > User:MichaelVerdi is the only one supporting Michael Meiser's > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mmeiser> suggestion. I hope they're > > aware of WP:MEAT <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:MEAT> . Apologies if > > I'm wrongheaded hereââ¬Â > > --Cailil <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cailil> talk > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cailil> 00:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > > > ââ¬Å"This is almost nothing but an attack. Close, and archive. I'm > > going to go ahead and call a spade a spade, and point out that the > > poster of this complaint has failed to assume good fiath > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AGF> .ââ¬Â > > ââ¬"ââ¬" Eagle101 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Eagle_101> > > Need help? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Eagle_101> 07:32, 3 > > May 2007 (UTC) > > > > ââ¬Å"See no reason for a ban. This is retaliation to the post above. > > Archive and suggest they cool down and sort this issue out via dispute > > resolution <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DR> .ââ¬Â > > --Kzrulzuall <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kzrulzuall> Talk > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kzrulzuall> ââ¬Â¢ Contribs > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kzrulzuall> 07:37, > > 3 May 2007 (UTC) > > > > Read the full proposed ban here: http://tinyurl.com/2gnhld > > <http://tinyurl.com/2gnhld> > > > > I hope that we can put the issue to rest and consider that perhaps > > there's a possibility that I perchance might have perhaps been trying to > > improve the article and not the other way around. > > > > and now ladies and gentlemen, ...your moment of zen. (please accept this > > as humour with only a tinge of bitterness) > > > > "This user - Pdelongchamp - constantly fucks with the entry. [...] It's > > pathetic. I can't believe Meiser still has the patience to try work on > > the article as his changes usually get deleted within hours." > > -Michael Verdi > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
