JAY JG wrote:
If enough people are reverting you, one could argue that what you are seeing is actually "concensus", not "3RR gamesmanship".
"One could argue" and "one could prove" are not the same thing.
And when the players in any particular page arrive totally at random, you have no chance of ensuring that "consensus" will do "the right thing" even most of the time. My real beef with the cries of "consensus!" from GeorgeStepanek is that he was the only one doing any reverting or talking during the time he was demanding there was consensus. And that's not consensus, it's a form of gamesmanship known as the "semi-bluff", in which you don't have a winning hand, but still have a chance to make one as the game progresses.
Personally, I don't think Taxman was doing anything other than misinterpreting the problem as educated vandalism and taking over where GeorgeStepanek had to stop (although his countdown of his reverts indicates he was laying the trap). Taxman's part in this is merely stupid. It's GeorgeStepanek who crossed the line, making many mistakes in accusing me of 3RR violation, and then CryptoDerk who went along gleefully absent of understanding.
--Blair