<html>
<body>
(resubmission, submitted before under improper email profile)<br><br>
Just a little note.<br><br>
In the interest of fairness I wanted to state that it may not be strictly
true that no one objects to the ban on User:Viking. I believe User:Triton
may. The following is from Triton on my Talk page (now archived at User
Talk:Dante Alighieri/clovis et al.):<br><br>
<i>Take a look now at the new way of humiliating a user. A new file has
been made called
<a href="http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Viking/ban">User
talk:Viking/ban</a> that will keep showing up on the Recent Changes list
as many times as their attacker(s) wish. When someone not involved sees
that, what is the impression of UserViking?<br><br>
</i>Now, I don't know for CERTAIN that this means Triton objects to the
ban, but I certainly would want to give Triton the chance to clarify
himself. I wouldn't want his comments to go unheard and risk us banning
Viking without giving anyone who cares to defend him a chance to do
so.<i> <br><br>
</i>Let's not ban Viking until we give Triton a clear chance to voice
himself. I would hate for Triton to go unheard.<br><br>
<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
-----<br><br>
Dante Alighieri<br>
dalighieri@digitalgrapefruit.com<br><br>
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain
their neutrality in times of great moral crisis."<br>
-Dante Alighieri, <i>1265-1321<br>
</i></body>
</html>