Kim's been acting a little strangely with votes lately, i've noticed.
On 9/1/05, Ryan Norton <wxprojects(a)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(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l