So your argument is: 1. This user has complained about me and my friends.
2. I think this is a problem, so I blocked them.
3. If you don't think it's a problem, you're a problem, so I will block you.
4. The fact that there is no policy allowing me to do this is not a problem
5. If you think it is, you are a problem, and I will block you.
Well, there's not much to say in response really is there? Nothing the community says is relevant, since none of it applies to you. Anyone who disagrees with you is a problem and will be blocked.
--- Phil Sandifer sandifer@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I'll decline, but is "willfully misreading claims to construct straw man arguments and thus have a position of alleged moral superiority" in the article? Because if not, it really should be.
As for your other complaint, Wikipedia policy pages are descriptive. When we are faced with a new problem, we do not spend a month or more working out a policy and then go to look if the problem is still around so we can fix it. Rather, we fix the problem, and if a particular style of solution to a particular style of problem becomes regular, we might get around to writing a policy page about it, but we're more likely to go watch TV.
-Snowspinner
On Jul 6, 2005, at 5:16 PM, SPUI wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
If your questions are of value you can ask them
with your name.
Otherwise you're just attempting to troll from cover.
I see no evidence of trolling, simply a legitimate
question. Maybe
you have a different definition of trolling. Try
adding
"disagreeing with the people in charge" to
[[trolling]] and see how
long it is before you're reverted. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
____________________________________________________ Sell on Yahoo! Auctions no fees. Bid on great items. http://auctions.yahoo.com/