Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 19:
Line 19: + +
you have a point, but ...
:::I couldn't care less if you think it's in my 'best interests' to not take that tone or not, quite frankly. It is abundantly clear that Aschlafly is putting his own, personal opinion as to whether Dawkins is a 'proper professor' or not on Dawkins page and is abusing his authority in order to prevent this being corrected, despite there being abundant evidence on the talk page that he is completely, totally and utterly wrong. Apart from anything else, that is arguably libel, especially considering this website describes itself as an 'encyclopedia'. As for 'cooling down', I am, in fact, perfectly cool. The simple fact of the matter is that Aschlafly is wrong, and is breaking his own Commandments in order to enforce his wrong views as 'fact', and all I am asking Aschlafly to do is abide by his own rules, or change them to ones he WILL abide by. Not to do one of those two things shows him up to be an utter hypocrite of the highest order. [[User:Zmidponk2|Zmidponk2]] 18:17, 29 January 2008 (EST)
:::I couldn't care less if you think it's in my 'best interests' to not take that tone or not, quite frankly. It is abundantly clear that Aschlafly is putting his own, personal opinion as to whether Dawkins is a 'proper professor' or not on Dawkins page and is abusing his authority in order to prevent this being corrected, despite there being abundant evidence on the talk page that he is completely, totally and utterly wrong. Apart from anything else, that is arguably libel, especially considering this website describes itself as an 'encyclopedia'. As for 'cooling down', I am, in fact, perfectly cool. The simple fact of the matter is that Aschlafly is wrong, and is breaking his own Commandments in order to enforce his wrong views as 'fact', and all I am asking Aschlafly to do is abide by his own rules, or change them to ones he WILL abide by. Not to do one of those two things shows him up to be an utter hypocrite of the highest order. [[User:Zmidponk2|Zmidponk2]] 18:17, 29 January 2008 (EST)
::::It's not arguably libelous. It is clearly libelous. --[[User:Horace28|Horace28]] 18:19, 29 January 2008 (EST)
::::It's not arguably libelous. It is clearly libelous. --[[User:Horace28|Horace28]] 18:19, 29 January 2008 (EST)
Assuming you have a point, I'd say that you have a better chance of getting it accepted - IF you use facts and reasoning rather than accusations and personal remarks. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 18:54, 29 January 2008 (EST)