User:Newbyguesses/Sandbox: Difference between revisions
Newbyguesses (talk | contribs) user blanks the sandbox |
Newbyguesses (talk | contribs) sandboxaloremipsum |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
drafty |
|||
==Clarification== |
|||
Could you explain (if you get time) some things to me about [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cla68]]. Do these processes close, or remain open for ever? There appear to be no posts since 01:53, 11 December 2007 Cla68 (Talk. Is there a "result", or has the "outcome" been satisfactory to you? |
|||
Is the Rfc closed, or could posts still be made there? Are you still bothered by the allegations which were made at the RFC, and repeated at your RFA? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Cla68&diff=137739161&oldid=137738416 Was this offer ever made good on?] |
|||
It appears to this editor, who is not privy to deleted contributions, or other Admin only channels of comunication, that unsupported allegations were made against you, yet no apology has been received? One specific allegation, (a minor one, comprising that you reside in the US) has been refuted. Another "allegation" that you posted to some (attack) site, appears to be an unfounded personal attack on you, and yet no evidence has been forthcoming. Together, the allegations made against you seem to have seriously undermined your position in a number of forums. |
|||
Of course, you have denied doing as SV alleges. The boot would be on the other foot if in fact there were proof that you posted to such a site. In that case, my own judgement would also become suspect. Do not reply if you are too busy with the Arbcom. or other matters, or if you feel that commenting at this time is inappropriate. |
|||
It is unfortunate that I have no experience of RFC, RFA and such, it is not good to be in an inferior position when there is the chance for the more powerful to stonewall and steamroller any opposition. I would like more information on these matters, but I do not wish to put you in an embarrassing position, considering the ongoing Arbcom. case, if replying here would inconvenience you, then dont, I will understand. |
|||
Revision as of 03:04, 17 February 2008
drafty
Clarification
Could you explain (if you get time) some things to me about Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Cla68. Do these processes close, or remain open for ever? There appear to be no posts since 01:53, 11 December 2007 Cla68 (Talk. Is there a "result", or has the "outcome" been satisfactory to you? Is the Rfc closed, or could posts still be made there? Are you still bothered by the allegations which were made at the RFC, and repeated at your RFA? Was this offer ever made good on?
It appears to this editor, who is not privy to deleted contributions, or other Admin only channels of comunication, that unsupported allegations were made against you, yet no apology has been received? One specific allegation, (a minor one, comprising that you reside in the US) has been refuted. Another "allegation" that you posted to some (attack) site, appears to be an unfounded personal attack on you, and yet no evidence has been forthcoming. Together, the allegations made against you seem to have seriously undermined your position in a number of forums.
Of course, you have denied doing as SV alleges. The boot would be on the other foot if in fact there were proof that you posted to such a site. In that case, my own judgement would also become suspect. Do not reply if you are too busy with the Arbcom. or other matters, or if you feel that commenting at this time is inappropriate.
It is unfortunate that I have no experience of RFC, RFA and such, it is not good to be in an inferior position when there is the chance for the more powerful to stonewall and steamroller any opposition. I would like more information on these matters, but I do not wish to put you in an embarrassing position, considering the ongoing Arbcom. case, if replying here would inconvenience you, then dont, I will understand.