" sherur""]. So no. No dispute resolution is going to make him civil. And the scary part? I think I'm missing some of his activities.   

  

 == Response by Subwayjack == 
 Hello Wayward, Subwayjack here. Woohookitty makes some valid points, however, not reflective of the whole history. I did make the obnoxious reference to KatefanO as described, I apologized to her personally and on the Talk Page. I was banned and allowed to return. In my frustrations wth the activity in the article and on the Talk Page, I have stated several times that ""I quit"", so what! Not against the rules. Just venting frustrations. The emails are private and outside of WP. Woohookitty has stated on the Talk Page that I threatened him. When asked for him to post the email and threats, he backed off because he knew it was untrue. As to Sherurcij being a victim of the ""F"" word, here are a few comments from his Talk Page: 
 :I'm sorry I'm not a radical 14-year-old as I'm guessing you are, but I assure you that vandalizing articles to say Richard Belmar was a guy the US lied and said was a terrorist and kidnapped and illegally detained because George Bush is a Nazi is not helping the world's view of the left-wing. So on behalf of those leftists who would actually like to be taken seriously, please shut the fuck up. 
 Yours truly, Sherurcij  
 ::Two wrongs don't make a right sweetie, didn't your mommy ever teach you that? Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject)  
 Go fuck yourself white boy. - Darwinek  
 I've never seen Sherurcij even remotely admonished for his baiting people to anger. And this is from Chesschamp21's talk page from Woohookitty: 
 :Subwayjack's comments were more severe than yours. I really just want everyone to take a deep breath and calm down a bit. Woohookitty(cat scratches)  
 I agree, as you stated on Woohookitty's talk page, that I have broken some policies, but what about the above issues and the bias shown by Woohookitty? As you also mentioned, you just did a cursory view of the activity, if everything were put together, perhaps a different POV might occur. Look at Chesschamp's psychotic and personally attacking questions on the Talk Page of Charles whitman, and people want to know why I get upset and want to bannish me? If I am to be singled out and the only one banned, that's fine! I will still consider WP a failed attempt to get the Charles Whitman article anywhere near the credible offering that WP professes to accomplish. I will leave you with a quote from Jonathon Swift which applies directly to the history of the Chas. Whitman article: 
 :Falsehood flies and the truth comes limping after; so that when men come to be undeceived it is too late: the jest is over and the tale has had its effect.  The Examiner, Number 15 (November 9, 1710)Thanks for the listen, Subwayjack! 

 ::Um subwayjack? Who do you think you are fooling. If you go here, you will see that in the edit summary, you said ""Alright CuntfanO, you broke the 3RR rule! Suspend yourself for a few hours and let cooler heads prevail."". You are a troll. Period. And as people on here know, it takes one hell of alot to get me to block users. You were given many opportunities. You keep saying ""I quit!"" and then doing lovely things like blanking out other's comments. You've quit about 4 times...even told kate to block you indefinitely and yet you keep trying to come back, as is evidenced here. You claim that you aren't using socks when you clearly are.   
 :::And nothing chesschamp has done has approached what you have done. As soon as you find him calling an administrator a ""cunt"" (and completely accusing her of violating 3RR when she had not, btw), let me know. And please drop this ""if I'm the only one banned, that's fine!"" stuff. Come now. if you truly didn't care, then why are you emailing me every other day and posting here? Please. Of course you care and of course you want to be unblocked. Otherwise you wouldn't keep badgering us. You would've just let it go and moved on if you truly didn't care. But Wayward, if you want to block others, go ahead. I was concentrating on jack and I'm not sure how blocking him and not others shows a ""bias"". There is nothing that says that if you block one person, you gotta block others. I was helping a friend (katefan) who was b