User talk:68.234.100.139

=

Discussion at WP:ANI

If you had been cooperative and read the comments you removed, and heeded them, this would not have been necessary. But since it seems that you are unable or unwilling to communicate well, I have started a discussion here. You are welcome to comment there, but please note that Wikipedia is a community and that just because (almost) anyone can edit Wikipedia doesn't mean everyone's edits or opinions can be included.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:46, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

And apparently you are intolerant of any editing and editors who don't comply with your wishes and don't share your beliefs, ideas and theories. You are censoring me, I have no interest in validating or legitimizing your censorship by participating in a "discussion" where you and fellow intolerant Wikipedian censors will form a collective "community" firing squad and discuss me and my contributions and their worthiness or lack thereof for your "community" online encyclopedia. You're edit-warring and waited a significant period of time to return to revert my reversion and delete my content. Now you want to act civil, polite and community-minded and feign pleasantness while criticizing me on my talk page. Sorry, but you're not worth my time and your own "contribution" is nothing but intolerance, censorship and rude personal attacks you think you cleverly disguise as goal-oriented constructive behavior and "communication". That and what will no doubt end up being additional hundreds or thousands of lines of text and wasted server space as you and others like you get your intolerance, insecurity and "conversations" on the "public record" that no doubt exceeds the actual size of actual Wikipedia encyclopedic content by dozens, hundreds or thousands of times.68.234.100.139 (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

You folks will spend minutes and hours and probably eventually even years of your lives explaining in great detail in a "civil" manner exactly who you want to exclude from the "community", why they should be excluded and providing "evidence" of their "destructive" or "disruptive" edits and/or "vandalism". Why? Because you're desperate to fit in and be accepted and feel worthwhile and needed, wanted and accepted by this "community" of people that have collectively denied or rescinded "membership" in the community to hundreds or thousands of people who wanted to participate but didn't feel the need to be governed at yet another level as they exercised their rights to freedom of thought, speech and self-determination simply to be "accepted" in an online community overwhelmingly consisting of people too fearful and apparently ashamed of their own membership in the "community" to publish their real names, locations, professions and become actually known to other members on a personal basis.

And of course they'll never admit unless forced to that they probably have many Wikipedia "accounts" and "identities" in direct contradiction of the "one user/one account" common courtesy practice of legitimate online community projects, forums and and groups. Of course they're NEVER "sockpuppets" because they've used and continue to use THEIR multiple accounts and identities for "legitimate" purposes. And THAT is the true "beauty" of people who hide in the Wikipedia "community" in order to matter, belong and be or at least feel as important as they think they deserve to be. As long as they follow "their" policies and practices and traditions, they can successfully EDIT and even CREATE "policies" to excuse their own behavior after using them to exclude others. I'll tell you why I really come to Wikipedia over and over despite being "banned" and "blocked" and scolded and chastised and criticized and belittled. Being here and having that done to me by the likes of you immensely improves my own sense of self-esteem and keeps me grounded in the real world.

By being "blocked" or "banned" and denied the "privilege" of being allowed by a chosen few to "edit the encyclopedia ANYONE can edit", I'm forced to do worthwhile and constructive things with my internet time and feel I'm not wasting it. I come here when I feel like wasting time. Not so much mine but the time of anyone who would rather waste their own time criticizing me and giving me "suggestions" and outright COMMANDS and ORDERS like they possibly have a chance in hell of controlling me like they themselves have so obviously been controlled. Apparently even those so tremendously brave that they block and ban others at their pleasure and whim and often the request of others they feel subservient to don't have the true "power" to make a ban or block stick.

Because I don't know how or why and don't care how or why (although I have an idea), but its been many, many months since a ban or block actually ran its full "duration" before I was able to edit again. No IP hopping, sockpuppeting or significant computer knowledge required. Maybe it has something to do with the financial contribution I made several months ago or my very simple efforts at increasing my "internet security" so the types of people who have such hate and intolerance for me on Wikipedia have a little less chance of "hacking" me and doing something really damaging like deleting the very few files and programs and tiny amount of "content" I keep on my computer are effective at "hacking" Wikipedia blocks if nothing else and regardless of me not knowing how or why for certain.

But I suspect that like most bullies, the cowardly Wikipedians who are mighty and powerful behind a keyboard hundreds or thousands of miles away end up doing something intentionally or accidentally that eliminates their "control" over me. Or my IP number, which is from a fairly large local telecommunications provider, is shared by other Wikipedians who become the victims not of MY actions but the actions of those who always claim that "no one owns Wikipedia" yet seem determined to possess it none the same. And when those more "respectable" or at least "compliant" Wikipedians complain about being denied the "privilege" of editing "the encyclopedia anyone can edit", a "consensus" is reached and the "powerful" are forced to revert themselves. Like I said, it doesn't matter and never will. Just like Wikipedia, which is the project that will never be finished as long as whiners still insist on getting their way.

Good luck with your discussion. Enjoy your community council of "superior" Wikipedians who can edit, delete and destroy actual contributions at will because they are "dedicated" to the cause of "building an encyclopedia".68.234.100.139 (talk) 11:50, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

P.S. Am I crazy or would it make a lot more sense and be a lot less effort and wasted time to have a DISCUSSION BOARD for "community communication" about unwanted edits and the desires and determination of those who will do what they want regardless and ignore consensus when it suits them BEFORE they start edit-warring against a "disruptive" or "destructive" or "vandalizing" editor? Honestly, acting all democratic and stuff AFTER you've already gone after someone and destroyed their contributions like you could ever be convinced to undo it after the fact is pretty hilarious and ridiculous.

Even the wolves had the intelligence and wit to APPEAR "democratic" as they discussed what to have for dinner with the sheep. Apparently Wikipedia career censorship specialists are either much more entitled, much less intelligent or utterly clueless and unaware of how foolish they look running to the "policy guide" and seeking "consensus" after the fact. Or maybe they're just a little too scared of other living, human beings they encounter online after going "cyber stalker" when some random IP editor dares to challenge their Wikipedia "authoritah". So they look for safety in numbers after they've potentially angered someone they have no reason to believe isn't as insecure, angry and introverted as they are who might actually act out against an online "enemy" the way they wish they could. Don't worry.

You just ain't worth it and the day a troll like you is able to get under my skin enough taht I do anything but laugh at his online displays of "power" and "authoritah" is the day I give up the internet entirely. Some of us live in the real world by choice and escape to the internet to be entertained. We don't live in the internet world and reluctantly give up our "importance" and "power" when we're forced to go into the real world and interact with real, live human beings. That's why you'll never find someone like me having even ONE "sockpuppet" account and defending its use as "constructive" when I'm found out and exposed.

THIS is my "alter ego" and its almost a fishing video game where with only a few minutes of typing I can snag a sucker, real him in, wear him out and then cut my line when he's right next to the boat so he's forced to swim around with a lure hanging out of his mouth wondering how that happened and where that guy with the stick and string went and just what the hell just happened to so radically alter his existence and destroy his dominance of his "pond" and wondering if it'll happen again the next time he shows up with his stick and string and one of those funky, shiny little "minnows" shows up with him. Ever do so much fishing and catch so many fish you catch the same one twice? That has to be a memorable experience for the fish and leave him progressively more annoyed, bewildered and agitated each time he's caught and released and caught and released and can't do a damn thing about it but starve to death or run and hide when the fisherman shows up or at least go hang out with his buddies and see if together they can come up with a plan to deal with this getting caught b.s. Kind of like you ran away and hid at a discussion board.

Have a wonderful today, and keep building this online encyclopedia "anyone can edit" one reversion, deletion, exclusion and expulsion at a time. You're doing important work here. No. Really. I mean it. How would this "encyclopedia" survive without you? Who would patrol it and love it and protect it from non-conformist, disruptive, destructive "vandals" who only only contribute by correcting errors, removing POV opinion unverified political trolling b.s. and adding facts, knowledge and useful information if you didn't? One of your non-sockpuppet "constructive" but still secret "alternate accounts"?