Hi,
I've been fighting for roughly the past half-day with 142.177.*.* (formerly 24.*.*.* and EntmootsOfTrolls) over [[Islamism]] and [[militant Islam]]. I must admit that I'm not really a very patient person, especially when the other party is not at all willing to engage, refuses to respond to my points, and is only interested in pushing his idiosyncratic viewpoint. It's even more irritating when the user has been hard-banned several times, and writes totally terrible, unfocused and irrelevant crap on top of everything else.
So, I'd like some advice on how to deal with this situation.
See [[Talk:Islamism]], [[Talk:Militant Islam/Delete]], and [[Wikipedia:Problem users]], where he listed myself and RK after I asked to have [[Islamism]] protected, for discussion. I'll admit my bias: I wrote most of [[Islamism]], and while it isn't perfect and needs a whole lot of work, I feel that the changes 142 is making are totally inappropriate.
Saurabh (Graft)
------ [T]he system isn't great leaders, great machinating people controlling it all. It's each person performing their job as one little cog in this thing.. -- Terry Gilliam, on 'Brazil'
So, I'd like some advice on how to deal with this situation.
If he's posting from an ip number, ban him. EntmootsOfTrolls is not banned, and is welcome to edit under that identity. He's also invited to behave in a co-operative manner, and to come to the mailing list to discuss any social problems he's having with others.
If I understand what EntmootsOfTrolls said recently, he's disappointed that he isn't banned. Maybe he's decided to get himself banned again?
He likes to talk the talk about community governance, but the evidence shows that he's not the least bit interested in submitting to community norms.
--Jimbo