It turns out that JzG is up to his old tricks in the quieter environment of the Spam Blacklist.
Apparently, last month, he unilaterally placed a couple of legitimate links on the "Spam blacklist" to enforce some content dispute he was involved in over
Cold Fusion.
Funnily enough, he did this shortly after I theorized here:
QUOTE(Kato @ Sat 27th December 2008, 6:16pm)
JzG has always been paranoid/obsessed/fixated with arbitrary bits of information which he alone judges to be "spam".
This "spam" notion is so riddled with discrepancies, anomalies and hypocrisies that only JzG has been able to fathom it.
Anything he comes across at any given time can potentially be removed by him as "spam". And the editor who added the removed material can quickly be denounced as someone "not cut out to be a Wikipedian" and may be added to his enemy list.
Some well respected spam supervisor bod picked him up on it (He actually wrote several scathing posts to JzG):
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...energytimes.comQUOTE(Abd to JzG bolding mine)
Blocking and banning people who hold a minority position and advocate it is highly unlikely to improve the encyclopedia; it's more likely to make it dull and less useful. When I'm researching a topic, I want to know about the minority positions, in an NPOV but relatively complete manner, not just majority views.
....
[JzG]'s been asked to revert the blacklisting on the grounds of conflict of interest, if nothing else, and he's refused. So ... we will now see if it is legitimate to make "fringe" arguments and RS arguments in blacklisting, if mission creep has overcome the restraints on the blacklists, and if an administrator can protect his own edits to an article by blacklisting. If that's happened, broader community attention will be necessary, I'm afraid. This part of this affair could end quickly, right here. --Abd (talk) 22:45, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
and sums up
QUOTE(Abd to JzG)
[this is] not the mission of the blacklist; instead, it was here used outside its mission by an administrator with clear involvement, in promotion of his "anti-fringe" POV, not in pursuit of true NPOV and balance, on the face of it, but of a "side."
JzG responds in the way only he knows how:
QUOTE(JzG)
Perhaps we can think again if we ever get rid of the ring of POV-pushers, but the fringe types are too much of a problem right now, they got far too embedded and lots of folks are having to work very hard to pick apart all their nonsense and move back towards policy compliance on several articles. Guy (Help!) 21:05, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
So JzG is doing this
all over again. Abd's assessment of JzG here could be applied to a dozen conflicts initiated by JzG in the past, word-for-word. Surely this berserker should be banned by now?
JzG up to his old tricks on the Spam Blacklist
Kato JzG up to his old tricks on the Spam Blacklist 
