[WikiEN-l] Perfection

[Jay Litwyn]

"Thomas Dalton" <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:a4359dff0905210715y374984dfgdc50e68a30de04e1 at mail.gmail.com...
> 2009/5/21 Jay Litwyn <brewhaha at freenet.edmonton.ab.ca>:
>> "Thomas Dalton" <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:a4359dff0905041400s344e381bl8129696714d09af5 at mail.gmail.com...
>>> 2009/5/4 stevertigo <stvrtg at gmail.com>:
>>>> Dealing with an issue on [[Talk:Perfect crime]]:
>>>>
>>>> Me: "...which is of course not to say that the concept of "perfect 
>>>> crime"
>>>> is
>>>> meaningless, just that it only has meaning outside of a religious view
>>>> and
>>>> within very narrow contexts like colloquial usage and crime novels. A
>>>> paragraph on the religious point of view doesn't hurt the encyclopedia
>>>> and
>>>> in fact gives the article greater depth and illumination."
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, what is your point? This isn't a good place to discuss
>>> individual articles, keep that on the talk pages. Did you have a
>>> general point you wanted to discuss?
>>
>> That rule excludes me, so I do not like it.
>> The name of the group is not "External Affairs".
>
> It excludes you because you have been blocked. That means the
> community does not want your contributions, not that it wants them
> somewhere else.

I hav been placed on moderation for feeding a troll. Speak for yourself, 
Mister Dalton. You must realize by now that you can only imagine what other 
people think, and in the moment you wrote "community", you were speaking for 
other blocked users who might want to know that they can contribute, here, 
regarding things that are ON wikipedia, rather than having everybody 
concentrate on what is not. The name of the group is not "External Affairs".