Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 09:13, 2 September 2007

"For God so loved that world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever should believe in Him, should have everlasting life." - John 3:16 --Jason Gastrich 23:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Note: This talk page is archived at /Archive | /Archive1 | /Archive2.

Accusations

Jason,

User:Nascentatheist has been accusing me of being your sockpuppet. Would you mind telling them I'm not? --Creashin 02:42, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

• Considering that Jason's history here has been one of deception and sock-puppetry, followed by denials of sock-puppetry, followed by admissions of sock-puppetry, followed by admissions of sock-puppetry to edit articles while banned, you should probably consider that his word will not be sufficient on the matter. As I have suggested elsewhere, if you are not Jason Gastrich, you should drop the matter and continue to edit as you have been doing, and allow site administration to conduct the investigation. As long as you do that, I will not be responding to you, and will go about my business, as well. It is now in their hands. - Nascentatheist 03:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Creashin, I've been blamed for countless sockpuppets that I haven't used. Don't be surprised if you take the blame for something you didn't do. Even this "Nascentatheist" is actually User:WarriorScribe and other sockpuppets of one Dave Horn. Talk to User:Usenetpostsdotcom because he knows Horn and his interests to take down Christianity. --Jason Gastrich 17:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• Jason, Creashin was established as a sock puppet of yours, and I suspect and have labeled Davesig as such, as well. I have already disproven claims that I am a sock puppet of someone else. When that disproof was provided, Uncle Davey fled the discussion and the accusations. I see, below, that you'd like to be unbanned, but your continued sock-puppetry and juvenile accusations won't be persuasive, nor will your name-dropping of uninvolved parties, as seen above and your other shenanigans. But I'll respond to that when I get to it, below. - Nascentatheist 08:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of J. Otis Ledbetter

J. Otis Ledbetter, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that J. Otis Ledbetter satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and the Misplaced Pages deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/J. Otis Ledbetter (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of J. Otis Ledbetter during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Guy (Help!) 14:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think I'm allowed to vote on this, but I'd be happy to if I could. --Jason Gastrich 17:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Unbanning

I'd like to be unbanned. Can someone tell me the process? --Jason Gastrich 17:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know you had a sense of humor, Jason. KillerChihuahua 09:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

• But Jason, you wrote, "spiritually, me and some other believers were becoming unequally yoked with unbelievers, having to form close relationships as we dredged over the minutia of each Christian entry and what should and shouldn't be included. In every case, the unbelievers wanted sensational, ridiculous, unencyclopedic, and in many cases incorrect information included and some others and I insisted on including the truth and excluding that nonsense. This opposition met us head on and I was eventually banned for one year. I don't see myself returning to Misplaced Pages because I have shaken the dust from my shoes. In fact, we even decided to end the Wiki4Christ.com web site that was sending Christians to Misplaced Pages. It is an awful place for Christians who sincerely want the truth fairly represented." So, have things improved at Misplaced Pages? Is Misplaced Pages no longer "an awful place for Christians?" What's different between then and now that anyone should believe that your presence would benefit the Project? That is what it's all about, after all.

• Of course, we all know that you've been back at Misplaced Pages a few times - or maybe 200 times, at least. The list of sock-puppets seems to bear that out. Even though you tell us, above, that the socks weren't yours, 47 of them were verified as yours , and you actually apologized for engaging in sock-puppetry during your previous attempt at reinstatement. After you were reinstated, you were found to be in violation again , and you even admitted that you had created accounts and edited while still under sanction as part of the administrative action taken against you . So even as you were banned for breaking the rules, you continued to break the rules. This prompts the same question, Jason. What's different about then and now? That was just a few months ago, and your behavior in all of the venues in which you have been involved shows no difference in your attitude toward "unbelievers." You also post contradictory statements about Misplaced Pages. To those viewing your web pages, it's "an awful place for Christians." Of course, we all know that those kinds of statements were "sour grapes" from having been banned, but it's curious that you would post at Misplaced Pages as if you cared about the Project. What evidence do we have to consider that you truly care about the Project or that you'll behave any differently than you did before? You've already posted an unsubstantiated suspicion about yours truly and posted a link to your Google Gossip Group on this talk page, and it's at that same Google Group at which you make a number of accusations - including against members of the Misplaced Pages community . You have done this under the pseudnym, "Fraud Buster," a proven Internet personality of your own that you actually tried to pretend wasn't and isn't you .

• Don't you also think it's a little silly to play dumb and ask for the procedure for reinstatement? After all, you went through the process just last April. Perhaps you forgot, but it does seem to me that nothing has changed about any of the things that got you banned in the first place. I will recommend against your reinstatement, and I suspect that I will not be alone. - Nascentatheist 09:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)