What really fucks me off is how everyone is blaming the Wikipedia Review
QUOTE
Blocking Mattbuck on this seems weak and a serious mistake in comparison to some of the unacceptable behaviour and dramah we have seen on-wiki from an apparent traveling circus which has not (yet) resulted in blocks all round. --Fæ (talk) 10:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
My comment was an observation. I would have more to say about this block if Mattbuck were to take the initiative to request an unblock and put forward their case, if they are not bothered then theorizing here just creates more material for WR fueled drama and personal attacks that we are all sick of by now. --Fæ (talk) 12:15, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
I support a prompt unblock as requested. Mattbuck has made a commitment to not post the proposal back that Rd232 found disruptive. If Mattbuck stays blocked then we probably all agree there is a list of at least ten other accounts that should be immediately blocked on the basis of deliberately disrupting Commons consensus processes with much more inflammatory material, some of it reposting or linking to dubious material and far more inflammatory canvassing discussions off-wiki. --Fæ (talk) 13:46, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
And what does Fae mean by 'dubious material'?