On Tue, 09 May 2006 00:37:32 +0200, you wrote:
Please look at the talk pages. I've never shied away from any discussion. And 3 reverts in 5 days can hardly be called edit-warring, nor does it explain a block for 1 week.
It can if it's against consensus, and you *know* it's against consensus, and you repeatedly do it anyway.
Many editors think that numerical supermajority equals consensus (it doesn't). Consensus is strictly reached only when all concerned have accepted a position.
Wise words - I winder who said that? But the lack of 100% agreement does not mean you can go ahead and enact the minority view in the mean time.
30 image removals per week clearly shows that no consensus has been reached, this is what I know.
No, it means that most people think one thing and a small coterie of edit warriors think another.
Your version of debate appears to be to re-state your position. Which, to be fair, is pretty much where everybody else there comes from.
Well, I don't think so. Please look again at Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Arguments/Image-Display I've been responsive to almost all arguments stated, leaving out only personal attacks.
You've been responsive in the sense of not changing your view. As has pretty much everyone else.
Come up with a new compromise.
Guy (JzG)