| Revision as of 05:17, 30 March 2008 editFeloniousMonk (talk | contribs)18,409 edits archiving← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:59, 3 April 2008 edit undoCla68 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers48,127 edits question for FeloniousNext edit → | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| ==Question on statement== | |||
| Felonious, in researching for an RfC I'm ], I found this interesting comment by you . Raul and Sandy appear to have a great relationship, one that has really helped Misplaced Pages's FA effort. In fact, Sandy is an alternate coordinator of the FA project. Knowing that, could you please explain what you meant by the following statements in your comment?: | |||
| * "Sandy, yes we know all about your campaign against Raul645" | |||
| * "Viewed in the light of your vendetta against Raul your comments are utterly transparent, part of that campaign" | |||
| * "your little group tries to maintain the FA review process to give you more control over FA content and guidelines, and you frequently use it as a weapon, either against Raul or against individual editors" | |||
| * "A good number of we admins have watching this from the sidelines for several months now, so don't make the mistake thinking that you're going to continue on like this at FA unopposed" | |||
| * "the group's aims are not the betterment of the project, but undermining and marginalizing fellow volunteers like Raul654 and SlimVirgin" | |||
| * "Until you stop trying to impose the inane new FA criteria and cease engaging in selective enforcement of same, I'm taking a personal interest in seeing your group's vendetta against Raul654 and SlimVirgin aired out and ended for good" | |||
| What exactly did you mean by these comments? I'm not seeing any evidence that any of this was going on. Do you stand by these remarks? I'm especially interested, in light of the subsequent revelations of invitation-only private mailing lists being used by some Misplaced Pages editors, what your "A good number of we admins have watching this from the sidelines" remark means. Please respond here or on my talk page. Thanks! ] (]) 01:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:59, 3 April 2008
feloniousmonk
Archives
Question on statement
Felonious, in researching for an RfC I'm drafting, I found this interesting comment by you . Raul and Sandy appear to have a great relationship, one that has really helped Misplaced Pages's FA effort. In fact, Sandy is an alternate coordinator of the FA project. Knowing that, could you please explain what you meant by the following statements in your comment?:
- "Sandy, yes we know all about your campaign against Raul645"
- "Viewed in the light of your vendetta against Raul your comments are utterly transparent, part of that campaign"
- "your little group tries to maintain the FA review process to give you more control over FA content and guidelines, and you frequently use it as a weapon, either against Raul or against individual editors"
- "A good number of we admins have watching this from the sidelines for several months now, so don't make the mistake thinking that you're going to continue on like this at FA unopposed"
- "the group's aims are not the betterment of the project, but undermining and marginalizing fellow volunteers like Raul654 and SlimVirgin"
- "Until you stop trying to impose the inane new FA criteria and cease engaging in selective enforcement of same, I'm taking a personal interest in seeing your group's vendetta against Raul654 and SlimVirgin aired out and ended for good"
What exactly did you mean by these comments? I'm not seeing any evidence that any of this was going on. Do you stand by these remarks? I'm especially interested, in light of the subsequent revelations of invitation-only private mailing lists being used by some Misplaced Pages editors, what your "A good number of we admins have watching this from the sidelines" remark means. Please respond here or on my talk page. Thanks! Cla68 (talk) 01:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)