nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 44:
Line 44: +
Talk:Essay: Freedom of speech (view source)
Revision as of 13:52, September 10, 2008
, 13:52, September 10, 2008→Conservapedian "Free" Speech: Please drop it.
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:02, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:02, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
:: Don't you think it's unfair that I (or anyone else,) should be blocked '''''without warning''''' for stating an unpopular opinion that irks a overzealous editor with block powers (I think you know who...)? If so, then I had ''every right'' to complain about it on the '''abuse''' page, it was '''entirely''' without warning! (And the fact that I received '''another''' for complaining about a previous block is just obscene.) And if not, then you and I have nothing more to discuss. [[User:DLerner|DLerner]] 09:04, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
:: Don't you think it's unfair that I (or anyone else,) should be blocked '''''without warning''''' for stating an unpopular opinion that irks a overzealous editor with block powers (I think you know who...)? If so, then I had ''every right'' to complain about it on the '''abuse''' page, it was '''entirely''' without warning! (And the fact that I received '''another''' for complaining about a previous block is just obscene.) And if not, then you and I have nothing more to discuss. [[User:DLerner|DLerner]] 09:04, 10 September 2008 (EDT)
::: I have told the administrator concerned that I would not have blocked you, but that I believe that in maligning the police force you ''did'' do something wrong, so you are not innocent, and that I could not argue that a one-day block was excessive. I'm sure that you are capable of contributing constructively here, so I would ask you to please drop this and get on with editing. If you insist on pursuing it, please send me an e-mail. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:52, 10 September 2008 (EDT)