QUOTE(Malleus @ Thu 22nd December 2011, 4:03pm)
QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 22nd December 2011, 4:18pm)
QUOTE(that one guy @ Thu 22nd December 2011, 10:28am)
The problem is when he calls a non-admin a "fucking cunt" well he sort of has a nice block coming to him.
Did he say something that was not true or did he say something that was not nice? (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/evilgrin.gif)
Some people just can't see the truth unless you shove it their faces spiced with a bit of pepper. I fully expect the outcome of ArbCom's deliberations to be rather similar to what happened to Ottava, but that's their loss, not mine.
If you read the actual decision, 99% of what people threw against me were not considered. It boiled down to me saying that an academic was not respected (i.e. a hack) was a big no no (even though I had reliable sources to make it qualify under BLP (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/biggrin.gif)) and that my claim that Moreschi and Folantin were tag teaming was wrong even though, as they admitted, an outsider would see an obvious relationship between their edits. I love how Brad said that most of the claims against me didn't really qualify for ArbCom decision yet sought to ban me anyway. Basically, the decision was "regardless of what the facts are, we don't want him around".
Similar to the magical way of transforming my 1 year ban into an indefinite ban because they took the probation clause and said "an indef is probation, right?"
I had over 50 people come out in support of me and said they were full of it. You will have far, far more Malleus. I would expect that if any Arbitrator actually tried to do to you what they did to me that the Arbitrator would be banned. It would be satisfying. And it has precedence - Rlevse found out the hard way that he wasn't immune. It has already been revealed that many of those sitting are plagiarists and just as bad as he was. Once they cross the wrong people, they will swiftly find themselves on the outside. What goes around comes around, after all.