Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
907
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 171:
Line 171: +
User talk:DamianJohn (view source)
Revision as of 09:18, February 27, 2013
, 09:18, February 27, 2013→DonnyC
==DonnyC==
==DonnyC==
The offending edit in question is [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=1036893 this]. This kind of relatively mild snark would get a first time offender a warning only, but Donny is no first time offender. Already before the recent block he managed to incur [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ADonnyC five blocks] for activities such as trolling, rudeness toward others, 90/10 rule violation and spamming. Notice that even you agreed with me one time that his behavior was block worthy (see the blocks Donny received on February 16). The fact that you did not revoke his block but merely shortened it suggests that your disagreement with me was not about whether or not Donny's behavior was blockowrthy, but only about the length of the block. In light of his past behavior, the only problem I have with the current block is that it's too short. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 03:58, 27 February 2013 (EST)
The offending edit in question is [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=1036893 this]. This kind of relatively mild snark would get a first time offender a warning only, but Donny is no first time offender. Already before the recent block he managed to incur [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3ADonnyC five blocks] for activities such as trolling, rudeness toward others, 90/10 rule violation and spamming. Notice that even you agreed with me one time that his behavior was block worthy (see the blocks Donny received on February 16). The fact that you did not revoke his block but merely shortened it suggests that your disagreement with me was not about whether or not Donny's behavior was blockowrthy, but only about the length of the block. In light of his past behavior, the only problem I have with the current block is that it's too short. - [[User:Markman|Markman]] 03:58, 27 February 2013 (EST)
:That edit is fine. Nothing even remotely wrong with it. They are having a discussion about the correct translation of a particular Hebrew word and Donny has added to it. My shortening of his block should not be read as meaning that I agreed with it even slightly. You appear to have something of a vendetta against DonnyC, and I don't know why, nor do I care. --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 04:18, 27 February 2013 (EST)