Difference between revisions of "User talk:PhilG"
(@DMorris) |
(→An unpersonal observation on a Second Chance: new section) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
:I should have thanked you for the welcome to this site. And thanks again for the (first sentence of your) warning. I don't see that I'm ''heading into [[90/10 rule]] territory'', though... [[User:PhilG|PhilG]] 09:50, 2 March 2010 (EST) | :I should have thanked you for the welcome to this site. And thanks again for the (first sentence of your) warning. I don't see that I'm ''heading into [[90/10 rule]] territory'', though... [[User:PhilG|PhilG]] 09:50, 2 March 2010 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == An unpersonal observation on a ''Second Chance'' == | ||
| + | |||
| + | I would have edited earlier but I run into an ''autoblock''. When my block was lifted , the reason stated was that it is a ''second chance''. I'm a little bit confused: I don't think that I missed my first chance. I was called ''prevaricator'' in the block comment - but no alleged ''straying from the truth'' had to be reverted! And I had to read in a mail that I have ''descended into accusing an administrator, ASchlafly, of closedmindedness and lying'', accusations which themselves seem to be without merit. | ||
| + | [[User:PhilG|PhilG]] 13:09, 10 March 2010 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 18:33, March 10, 2010
Welcome!
Hello, PhilG, and welcome to Conservapedia!
We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.
At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!
Thanks for reading, PhilG!
DMorris 11:57, 26 January 2010 (EST)
90/10
FYI, you're headed into 90/10 rule territory. Frankly, I would be blocking you right now if I were a sysop. DMorris 12:10, 19 February 2010 (EST)
- I should have thanked you for the welcome to this site. And thanks again for the (first sentence of your) warning. I don't see that I'm heading into 90/10 rule territory, though... PhilG 09:50, 2 March 2010 (EST)
An unpersonal observation on a Second Chance
I would have edited earlier but I run into an autoblock. When my block was lifted , the reason stated was that it is a second chance. I'm a little bit confused: I don't think that I missed my first chance. I was called prevaricator in the block comment - but no alleged straying from the truth had to be reverted! And I had to read in a mail that I have descended into accusing an administrator, ASchlafly, of closedmindedness and lying, accusations which themselves seem to be without merit. PhilG 13:09, 10 March 2010 (EST)