Changes

reply re: proposed substitute
Line 43: Line 43:     
:This being said, I feel that this version is not as good as my previous effort.  If anyone would like to add constructive editing or suggestions, that would be nice. --[[User:Jimmy|Jimmy]] 11:14, 26 May 2008 (EDT)
 
:This being said, I feel that this version is not as good as my previous effort.  If anyone would like to add constructive editing or suggestions, that would be nice. --[[User:Jimmy|Jimmy]] 11:14, 26 May 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
:: Jimmy, your version above does not even explain clearly, up front, what the disclaimer said.  It has mistakes (behave?) and makes an unjustified reference to the judge as a "conservative".  I agree with Jinxmchue that your proposal is unacceptable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:33, 26 May 2008 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,506

edits