| Revision as of 13:17, 24 February 2010 editClayt85 (talk | contribs)146 edits →Your edit to WP:AE← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:30, 24 February 2010 edit undoClayt85 (talk | contribs)146 edits →Your edit to WP:AENext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| I've rolled back your edit - please do not edit archived sections. If you disagree with the outcome of an enforcement, you may appeal it to the Arbitration Committee. Thanks, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC) | I've rolled back your edit - please do not edit archived sections. If you disagree with the outcome of an enforcement, you may appeal it to the Arbitration Committee. Thanks, <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 19:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :I was actually in the process of editing at the exact time the discussion was archived, so that when I began my post the conversation was still live. Conversely, you should know better than to archive a discussion that is still ongoing. Indeed, your need to quickly cover your tracks (as you continue what has become a long-standing misuse of power by ArbCom in the disastrous mishandling of this entire situation) speaks volumes. Given your decision on the matter (in spite of the overwhelming opposition to your decision, as posted on the archived page), I cannot help but understand.] (]) 13:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC) | :I was actually in the process of editing at the exact time the discussion was archived, so that when I began my post the conversation was still live. Conversely, you should know better than to archive a discussion that is still ongoing. Indeed, your need to quickly cover your tracks (as you continue what has become a long-standing misuse of power by ArbCom in the disastrous mishandling of this entire situation) speaks volumes. Given your decision on the matter (in spite of the overwhelming opposition to your decision, as posted on the archived page), I cannot help but understand.] (]) 13:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :On re-read, that was a little less civil than I had intended, and I appreciate you taking the time to fix my accidental edit of an archived page. But seriously, this entire arbitration process has become a slap in the face of justice.] (]) 13:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC) | |||
| == Will you join WikiProject Physics? == | == Will you join WikiProject Physics? == | ||
Revision as of 13:30, 24 February 2010
Help
Hi, I'm posting this on your (and other members of the Maths Wikiproject) talk as we need editors who are knowledgeable about Mathematics to evaluate the following discussion and check out the editors and articles affected. Please follow the link below and comment if you can help.
Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_review_-_uninvolved_admin_request.
Thankyou. Exxolon (talk) 18:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Modification of Brews' sanctions
Hi Clayt85:
- Thank for your support during this action. Unfortunately, despite your sensible observations, the effort appears likely to fail, with no attempt made to confront the issues, just a knee-jerk "me too" reaction to support the status quo. Unfortunately, another blow to confidence in the arbitration process and its willingness to actually assess. Brews ohare (talk) 19:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Your edit to WP:AE
I've rolled back your edit - please do not edit archived sections. If you disagree with the outcome of an enforcement, you may appeal it to the Arbitration Committee. Thanks, Sandstein 19:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- I was actually in the process of editing at the exact time the discussion was archived, so that when I began my post the conversation was still live. Conversely, you should know better than to archive a discussion that is still ongoing. Indeed, your need to quickly cover your tracks (as you continue what has become a long-standing misuse of power by ArbCom in the disastrous mishandling of this entire situation) speaks volumes. Given your decision on the matter (in spite of the overwhelming opposition to your decision, as posted on the archived page), I cannot help but understand.Clayt85 (talk) 13:17, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- On re-read, that was a little less civil than I had intended, and I appreciate you taking the time to fix my accidental edit of an archived page. But seriously, this entire arbitration process has become a slap in the face of justice.Clayt85 (talk) 13:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Will you join WikiProject Physics?
It would be good to have you there. Looking forward to it.Likebox (talk) 19:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Also, if you would like a place to put your comment, consider the motion against me at AN/I, or the unban request for Brews ohare.Likebox (talk) 19:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)