Hi, Can I ask what was the main argument(s) that clinched the decision? [[User:Laurel Lodged|Laurel Lodged]] ([[User talk:Laurel Lodged|talk]]) 16:42, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Can I ask what was the main argument(s) that clinched the decision? [[User:Laurel Lodged|Laurel Lodged]] ([[User talk:Laurel Lodged|talk]]) 16:42, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
:There was no single, stand-out clincher. What was decisive was the near-unanimous consensus against you and your inability or unwillingness to accommodate it. As it is you have been restricted from a tiny, tiny section of the encyclopaedia's contents and you have the whole of the rest of the place to work on. I quite understand that you would prefer not to have been topic banned and feel you are still in the right. But I do think that damping this argument down for 6 months will be to the net benefit of Wikipedia. Don't see it as a defeat - treat it as a sabbatical and a chance to work on some new areas of interest. [[User:Kim Dent-Brown|<font face="century gothic" color="#0E6E2D">Kim Dent-Brown</font>]] [[User talk:Kim Dent-Brown|<font face="century gothic" size="1" color="#0E6E2D"><sup>(Talk)</sup></font>]] 19:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Talk archives can be seen here
You can email me from this link but in the interests of Wiki-transparency, please message me on this page unless there are pressing reasons to do otherwise.
Disruptive edits
Dear Kim Dent-Brown, I saw that you have blocked User:Hnbaofeng. Another user, User:Fair99999 is now posting the same material (together with identical edit summaries). As I don't know too much about protocol in this case, I should kindly ask you to take a look. Sincerely, 㓟 (talk) 08:19, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Myself and User:Makedonia have recently been vandalized by User:Bronx24 by changing our homepage. Could you please revert these our vandalized pages to what they were?
You don't need admin powers to do that - you can do so yourself quite legitimately and I see you have done so to your own page. I've reverted the other change and I'll keep an eye on this, thanks for the warning. Kim Dent-Brown(Talk)09:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. Please don't post any more at his talk page, as requested. You could seriously look at your methods of argumentation too - if you really think that was the way to make friends and influence third party observers, you couldn't be more wrong. You made his case very well for him. Kim Dent-Brown(Talk)21:28, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I admit I am a bit abrasive and blunt these days. I used to be much more politically correct and careful about how and what I said and I just got shit on so I gave up. The truth is I'm so tired of the admins (generally speaking) only looking at the last comment and not the whole picture. I'm also getting pretty tired of how some of the supposedly trusted users treat others and are allowed to get away with it while us lowly editors aren't allowed to be admins because we can't be trusted. I have really gotten a sour taste with the whole place. Its truly not enjoyable and frankly I don't even know why I stick around anymore. I guess I keep hoping things will turn around. Probably not though. Anyway, thanks again. Take care. Kumioko (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Sitush, that was horrible to watch and I just hope they don't find another venue to continue the fun and games. Irony is, I have huge respect for both of them for the good work they do elsewhere! Kim Dent-Brown(Talk)15:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) from me as well. I was debating about what to say and how to say it without adding fuel to the fire, fortunately you saved me from my quandaries — Ched : ? 15:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There was no single, stand-out clincher. What was decisive was the near-unanimous consensus against you and your inability or unwillingness to accommodate it. As it is you have been restricted from a tiny, tiny section of the encyclopaedia's contents and you have the whole of the rest of the place to work on. I quite understand that you would prefer not to have been topic banned and feel you are still in the right. But I do think that damping this argument down for 6 months will be to the net benefit of Wikipedia. Don't see it as a defeat - treat it as a sabbatical and a chance to work on some new areas of interest. Kim Dent-Brown(Talk)19:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
