| Revision as of 13:09, 12 August 2006 editLar (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators29,172 edits Civility warning← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:55, 12 August 2006 edit undoKwame Nkrumah (talk | contribs)1,129 edits →Civility warningNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| == Civility warning == | == Civility warning == | ||
| I find this edit to be less than civil: I also don't find your user page in its current state to be very civil, it's borderline at best. Please try to be more civil in future or you may find yourself blocked again. Also, read ]... if there is a revert war, it is lame to complain about which version ends up protected or reverted to. Removal of this warning without a clear indication that you have read and understood it might result in your being blocked. Please do not remove it or subsequent warnings. You should reply here, I have this page on watch. ++]: ]/] 13:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC) | I find this edit to be less than civil: I also don't find your user page in its current state to be very civil, it's borderline at best. Please try to be more civil in future or you may find yourself blocked again. Also, read ]... if there is a revert war, it is lame to complain about which version ends up protected or reverted to. Removal of this warning without a clear indication that you have read and understood it might result in your being blocked. Please do not remove it or subsequent warnings. You should reply here, I have this page on watch. ++]: ]/] 13:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :I do not agree with you. You may be not happy with the post, but I was explaining my position with civility. Civility and distaste for a user (admin) actions are compatible. | |||
| :Also, my issues with those users affect my edits. I think I am allowed to write down what are the issues I have open with them | |||
| :It is lame to complain for an admin to protect a page on the "wrong version", and infact I did not complain when he did the first time. The second time he protected the "right version", but later ''reverted the protection and moved back to the "wrong version"''. This means he actually ''endorsed'' the two pages. | |||
| :I will remove this thread once it is closed. | |||
| ::Kwame Nkrumah | |||
Revision as of 13:55, 12 August 2006
Civility warning
I find this edit to be less than civil: I also don't find your user page in its current state to be very civil, it's borderline at best. Please try to be more civil in future or you may find yourself blocked again. Also, read the wrong version... if there is a revert war, it is lame to complain about which version ends up protected or reverted to. Removal of this warning without a clear indication that you have read and understood it might result in your being blocked. Please do not remove it or subsequent warnings. You should reply here, I have this page on watch. ++Lar: t/c 13:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- I do not agree with you. You may be not happy with the post, but I was explaining my position with civility. Civility and distaste for a user (admin) actions are compatible.
- Also, my issues with those users affect my edits. I think I am allowed to write down what are the issues I have open with them
- It is lame to complain for an admin to protect a page on the "wrong version", and infact I did not complain when he did the first time. The second time he protected the "right version", but later reverted the protection and moved back to the "wrong version". This means he actually endorsed the two pages.
- I will remove this thread once it is closed.
- Kwame Nkrumah