\

To answer  and in doing so  as well, I do not take to gaming Wikipedia lightly.  Especially when I find myself involved with those editors doing so? Who's gaming wikipedia? Firstly; Arthur Rubin. Have you looked at the laundry list of violations this "admin." has racked up? Deleting other users posts on talk pages, tag team reverting, blocking, edit warring, being blocked etc. etc. etc. A short review of the section on my talk, brought to me by an IP editor too afraid to use their actual user-account informed me of his nefarious record here on Wikipedia. I refuse to walk into a known hostile article with hostile editors waiting to pounce like Subject Trolls. Who set this precedent of a hostile editing environment? Arthur Rubin, whose repeated rule-busting and counter-productive, antagonistic dancing around the issues leads only to toxic situations like this. I am NOT a push-over. Further, the editors in question,  and  make zero suggestions or concessions, oh but the "undo" button never fails to escape their attention.  How many times do I have to say this? These editors have the same stone-wall tactics and bad attitudes responsible for the grid lock in Washington D.C. where only the people/Wikipeia viewer are/is made to suffer. This is why, people like Arthur Rubin should not be a Wikipedia admin., this is why people like Arthur Rubin should not even so much as be Wikipedians. As of now, I will be writing an email to Wikipedia management and demanding his permanent dismissal and subsequent blocking of his most used IP. By the way, it has not escaped me that you haven't made one mention of the inability of either  or  violations of Common Sense or Wikipedia:Assume good faith cornerstones. Have you read the battle that occurred in the Koch Family talk page? Like a good (and apparently "stupid") little Wikipedian, I'm trying to problem solve and placate these obvious POV editors wants, needs, desires and demands and I am rewarded by being given nothing in return. Even though, as stated before and I'll state it again, they enter negotiations with a round of ridiculous arguments, easily explained away then only to return with 3 more for every one I argue down. Wikipedia is one of the most "Gamed" websites there is. The only reason I wont quit is because I know doing so would only go to make users like the ones stated above jovial with relief that their POV pushing may continue un-disrupted.