Scott Stevenson wrote:
Well, you did that already for me, didn't you?
After this "hit list" was deleted, rather
than accept the deciscion to
do so (which other than himself and User:Striver no one rejected) he
continued on strongly trying to resurrect it (without ever having
acknowledged that his initial actions were wrong).
I don't know how you define a "hit list", since according to
http://dictionary.reference.com a "hit list" can be both,
a list of potential victims and a list of designated targets,
but I sincerely hope, that you don't assume I tried to compile
a list of admins, who I planned to attack in the future.
<snip/>
Your droning on is really beating on a dead horse over
this and if you
continue to conduct yourself as you have been and do not follow the
advice of your fellow contributors as far as trying to form a
consensus for your actions then it is safe to say that the likelyhood
for your eventually becoming permanently blocked is very good.
That sentence doesn't really make sense to me.
Am I supposed to stop what you call "droning" respectively
"beating on a dead horse" or am I supposed to try to form
a consensus? Or is the likelyhood for becoming permanently
blocked very good either way?
--
Raphael