=To "Softsell"== 
 You arrive out of the blue on Wikipedia, and proceed to make a bunch of edits to the Justin Berry article, the only one you have ever edited.  When some of the more ill-conceived ones are reverted, you cry that you are losing some sort of battle against "the pedophiles."  You then claim the ability to track other Wikipedia editors all over the Internet, and that you are sending their posts in other venues to the FBI.  At this point, I don't think it would be possible for you to regain anything that remotely looks like credibility, or to expect people looking at your further input to assume good faith on your part. 

 You resort to the typical tactics of a sex abuse crank, mentioning buzzwords like "pedophiles" and "adult/child sex" in every other sentence, and mentally translating all sorts of complex social issues into only those terms.  You try to set yourself up as both a participant and the judge of any resulting discussion, unilaterally declaring a set of rules and tests by which you will decide for everyone whether others have made their point. 

 I don't do litmus tests.  I don't do hoops.  I eat sacred cows for lunch. 

 You need to go back to the place you previously expounded your interesting theories about "adult/child sex" and stay there, hopefully performing before a less critical audience. By all means continue your warm relationship with the FBI.  Vigilante busybodies are the cornerstone of every police state.