Kim's been acting a little strangely with votes lately, i've noticed.
On 9/1/05, Ryan Norton wxprojects@comcast.net wrote:
Hi,
I don't know what's going on here - I followed policy to the letter here.
The page in question is -
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/ index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Votes_for_deletion&curid=1003209&action=h istory
I was restoring comments blanked on the page by Kim Bruning, an admin, with the summary
"BIG RV. Some id10t tried to implement voting on the "let's make sure vfd is not voting" discussion. Um. Ok. Undoing the screwage"
(It wasn't my comment it was someone else's). Basically that dispute was they were renaming all "votes for deletion" pages to "articles for deletion", and assuming there was consesus to do so, but were not holding anything formal like a VfD process or whatever.
That's irrelevant though, because I wasn't trying to prove anything at all. I just wanted to have a VfD conversation over it, and this was on the talk page which seemed appropriate (and evidently several other people thought so too).
The summary before I reverted again was "Del the requested move vote again. I didn't look too hard who put it back, because if I did, I'd have to do really bad things to them"
To which I responded on the talk page that I thought it would be better for them to come up with something better, rather than simply wiping it from the talk page.
Anyway, there were NO warning on my talk page about the possiblity of violating WP:POINT or being blocked for 24 hours. This has a left a very bitter taste in mouth, and I don't know if I'll be coming back after this, as I have always thought I acted in a mature and responsible matter.
Ryan
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l