Guy Chapman writes: I think disingenuousness is unbecoming, Guy, and your meaning was quite plain. The point you have been making has not been about "right or wrong" but about your insinuations, for which you have been unable to produce any actual evidence, that I am advancing my own POV. You refer to "my known interests" when what you mean is the POV you perceive me as having. However, your perceptions have been and are wrong. That is very objectionable. I doubt you or anybody else can accurately discern my opinions from reading my edits. No it isn't. I was just having a light-hearted joke with the edit summary (no-one could write a long article about 338,171), and commenting that it would be no bad thing if speedy patrollers should look into things a bit more before jumping to delete. That's an implicit criticism but I wouldn't go further than that. It's a mistake I have made myself once (Catpiano). Given all you have said about me, you have a strange definition of 'friend'. In every case where I have been blocked, the situation has been resolved in favour of the position I was advocating. If I come across as forceful in making a case, this is because I believe the case has great force. I am also undeterred by the prospect of being blocked. You can actually change that approach in an instant if you want to. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .