On 11/8/05, Autymn D. C. lysdexia@sbcglobal.net wrote:
Rdsmith4 is misrepresenting and libelling me, and abusing his joke-of-a-power again by blocking me again after I had insisted and enforced that an article be put in an accurate grammatic mood to fit the context, which was not real but ideal.
It looks to me like you were insisting that the phrase "The sun emits power" to "the sun emit power" . etc.You were told by numerous people that this is wrong yet you continued to revert. BTW he is not libelling you. Please don't use legal terms like this.
A short exchange is at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk: Lysdexia#Grammar_at_Black_Body. There, I pointed out that his and others' calling my edits only "trolling and disruption" was a fraud, as every edit I've ever made to Wikipedia was, in this order: cleanup, fact checking, factual disputes, linking, added or alternate explanations, expansions. I checked the block policy page and saw that nothing I've done calls for blocking me; in deed, every incident that I was in was caused by someone ignorant, irrational, and uncouth reporting me to the administrators because I had done something to correct or improve a space that /they/ /did not/ /understand/.
When everyone disagrees with you, you should at the very least _consider_ the possibility that they are right and you are wrong don't you think? By insisting on your wording even though it plainy reads wrong and sounds silly you are opening up yourself to accusations of trolling.
Every
mistake that they claimed I'd made elsewhere was /their/ mistake of being an ignorant fool.
Personal attacks are not allowed on wikipedia. Please don't call people names.
Lately I've been bringing out my contentions to the Talk pages before editing over the articles,
Did you do that in this case before you reverted and called someone a vandal for correcting your bad grammar?
and I hadn't even broken the three-revert
rule when I was reverting when I found that I was blocked after trying to fix some numbers in an Order of magnitude article. Here's the note that's related to my work then: http://egroups.com/group/message/free_energy/20090. I was logged in then, and found that the block was for a day; but the next time I found that my cookies expired, for Yahoo! and Wikipedia, so I had to log in again. But before I did, I saw what happened when I tried with the numeric IP. The same block screen came up, so I logged in and found that the block was advanced another day!
This is the autoblocker. You need to not edit at all either logged in or not. Then the block will expire.
I seem to recall this happening before, and I didn't deserve it then either. Note that every time this rogue took abusive action against me, he gave no warning before so that I could reply instead of doing whatever he was told that I shouldn't, against policy, and that he calls my edits of fake value, also against policy. This person has no clue what he's doing, and I really need to update my article, as I have a life outside edit or dispute wars.
I'm glad to hear that. Come back after a day, but please do not correct any more grammar, as you appear not to understand it.
Theresa