User talk:Angela: Difference between revisions

572 bytes added ,  10 February 2004
blocking is for simple vandals... whether or not they are sysop-vandals
(proves two points: Angela will ask for censorship but when asked to undo it, she'll plead "not technically possible", and, Starling usurps sysop powers as a developer)
(blocking is for simple vandals... whether or not they are sysop-vandals)
 
Line 9: Line 9:
::Interesting.  "Not technically possible".  You are willing to whine and beg others to CENSOR people, but not to UNCENSOR them.  You hide behind what the technology can do, or what you personally are empowered with it to do, when the result would be what you don't like.  Another lack of principle.
::Interesting.  "Not technically possible".  You are willing to whine and beg others to CENSOR people, but not to UNCENSOR them.  You hide behind what the technology can do, or what you personally are empowered with it to do, when the result would be what you don't like.  Another lack of principle.
::It also reveals how afraid the [[GodKing]] and his cabal are - they have to actually use blocks that ordinary sysops can't undo, knowing how strong the appetite for [[m:regime change]] is, and how many friends we have now BECAUSE WE ARE RIGHT.
::It also reveals how afraid the [[GodKing]] and his cabal are - they have to actually use blocks that ordinary sysops can't undo, knowing how strong the appetite for [[m:regime change]] is, and how many friends we have now BECAUSE WE ARE RIGHT.
------------
Moving some talk relevant to one user's behaviour to a "flames" page is no big deal, but censoring talk files deliberately that outline such habits as relying on [http://disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=echo_chamber Echo chamber]] lies to excuse excluding people you don't like... that is quite relevant to the mission of this wiki.  Keep censoring these things, without answering to any of the detailed points, and sadly there may be a need to ask for you to be blocked.
Blocking is for simple vandals.  And that's what you appear now to be. - 142
Anonymous user