User talk:81.102.233.188

Escape orbit, great name btw, i know better because i have a detailed knowledge of the subject, you complete cretin, something you obviously don't. The discussion was irrelevant to the article, hence it being rejected by editors, and was pu there with no other intention than to sully the name of the club. How do i know this? Because as someone with a knowledge of what i am talking about i'm aware that the subject matter has been used continuously by a certain section of fans from a rival club as a means of points scoring; this is bourne out by the repeated posting of the subject matter on internet media platforms, including now wikipedia, by vandals with malicious intent. There is also a website, set up by this minority of bigots, with the soul purpose of bring this issue into the spotlight despite it having nothing to do with those they are aiming it at. The matter has been the subject of numerous libel cases and as such should not be on the discussion page. The fact that it is gives the victory to the small minded people who intended it to be there. But rather than concede that you don't have the first clue what you are dealing with and the fact it is libelous, you have now succeeded in having me wrongly banned. To you i say well done; i'm sure you feel a great sense of power now in your otherwise empty life. Still, though, it doesn't change the fact you were wrong and i am now banned for no other reason trying to ashere to the noble principles on which wikipedia was founded. Hopefully you, or any other editor, who happens across this will have the decency to reverse the ban but i do not wait with baited breath. This, however, underlines the fundamental flaw with wikipedia and one which wil be it's downfall.

Edit: In reply to your assertions that i acted in haste and without explanation. As illustrated above the content was libelous and does qualify to be removed. I explained at length to numerous editors and on the article talk page my reasoning for removing content, howver, this does not seem to have been noticed by you, hence you pompous, authoritarian attitude. If you had read it you would have seen that reasoning and my pleas for your assistance in placing the relevant sources. But no, you plowed on in the misguided and cynical fashion in which you are now.

---