| Revision as of 11:53, 13 May 2007 editDtcdthingy (talk | contribs)1,720 edits rv← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:20, 13 May 2007 edit undoCanterberry (talk | contribs)1,036 edits Revert WP:PA Personal AttackNext edit → | ||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| :I have now decided to become a "reviewer" of recent edits. From what I have seen, this enables me to submit my "2p" worth, but without having to contribute to any articles, or get involved in edit wars. ] 12:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC) | :I have now decided to become a "reviewer" of recent edits. From what I have seen, this enables me to submit my "2p" worth, but without having to contribute to any articles, or get involved in edit wars. ] 12:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| == Antisocial behaviour == | |||
| If you disagree with an edit, state your reasons and revert it, or hell, leave it alone and get on with your life. Snarking at people and making baseless claims about vandalism and required registration is not helpful. You've by your own admission installed yourself as an enforcer here, which is by far the most destructive kind of community member. --] 19:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==Please assume good faith== | ==Please assume good faith== | ||
Revision as of 13:20, 13 May 2007
I decided to stop contibuting to WP. This place does my head in with all the arguments. Canterberry 11:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have now decided to become a "reviewer" of recent edits. From what I have seen, this enables me to submit my "2p" worth, but without having to contribute to any articles, or get involved in edit wars. Canterberry 12:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Please assume good faith
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors, which you did not on User_talk:82.45.163.4. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
This comment to an unregistered user shows an appalling lack of good faith. They may have a different opinion to you, but that is no reason to accuse them of vandalism. Your logic seems to be that "this user is unregistered; most vandals are unregistered; therefore this user is a vandal" is akin to "Canterberry has no user page; most vandals have no user page, therefore...". All users have the right to remain anonymous, and to have differring opinions. Please respect this in future. – Tivedshambo (talk) 22:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)