You're both right in the sense that enough is enough. If you haven't noticed, I've hardly contributed a thing to the RefDesk in quite a while. If you also haven't noticed, many other valuable editors who used to contribute regularly just, say, a year ago, are now long gone. I suppose I was left the only one to hold the fort. It's now clear, however, that you simply don't appreciate what's happening here, and no matter how hard I try, you never will.

I know this will be futile, but I'll explain how I see things one last time: The Humanities RefDesk used to be a wonderful place to learn. OPs would ask questions, and a decent variety of intellectuals would put in their admittedly POV two-cents, with the result of providing the OP with a variety of differing POV answers, which is basically the closest one can get to an NPOV answer to any "humanities" related topic. This was the Humanities RefDesk I fell in love with.

Now, however, it's pretty much dominated by one supposed omniscient Cambridge Phd. One who verbally abuses other editors in the cruelest and most sadistic of manners due to the "folly" she percieves in their contributions (while the admins conveniently turn a blind eye). One who is incapable of those all-too-human facets known as humilty and fallability. This editor proceeds upon handing down, as if from above, her more-often-than-not flawed, revisionist, biased, and downright incorrect responses (and from my own ethnic POV, extremely offensive and insulting to the memory of my family) to historical questions. When these responses are succesfully challenged, she is incapable of responding in a civil manner (not just to me) and lowering herself to "stand corrected".

These, to me, are not the makings of a RefDesk editor, nor a proper historian. 

But once again, you're right. Enough is enough. I've spent far too much time and effort on this. If you'd indeed prefer the Humanities RefDesk to degenerate into a ClioBlog, then that last obstacle you've been facing, little old Loomis51, has given up. I fought the good fight, and I'm damned proud of it. This, to me, is truly a sad day for Wikipedia.

This is no grand exit, no demand to be blocked, nothing melodramatic like that. I still love Wikipedia and its articles. Unfortunately that once great Humanities RefDesk that I couldn't wait to come to visit upon returning home from work, in order to learn new things, and (hopefully) return the favour by sharing whatever I know with others, is no longer. 

I'm not really sure what all those nonsensical "conditions" you noted above were, nor did I pay much attention to them. Whether my words above are some sort of "breach" of those conditions, I have no idea, nor do I care. 

I just can't help but find it funny that you've extended your jurisdiction to Wikiversity. What's next? If you can somehow hack into my Yahoo account, will my emails now be scrutinized for any anti-Clio content? How about MSN? Is it ok if I call Stu up on the phone and speak "inappropriately" of her? lol (Not that either of us really cares about all this bullshit to actually talk on the phone about it, we have lives, you know! We've never even spoken on the phone, and interestingly, I know rather little about him except that he's apparently from Detroit and that we disagree on pretty much every issue except for the fact that Clio's a fraud! I'm actually rather curious. I've often wondered if Stu is perhaps some obese Asian guy, some skinny Black guy, some white senior citizen, or whatever!) 

If you want to block me, then block me. If you don't, then don't. It's all so obviously arbitrary that I really don't give a shit at this point what you do. All you should know is that I'm just pretty much fed up with the whole RefDesk farce, and I don't really see myself engaging in it in any way any time soon. I have absolutely no intention of any further "Doctor Anastasia" bashing, as like I said, it's futile. If you don't believe me, then block me. If not, then don't. Do as you please.

Let me just mark this day, June 4th, 2007. Let's just see how the Humanities RefDesk looks in say, six months from now: December 4th, 2007. Will all be as is? Will any of my remarks ring any truer? Let's just see. In the meantime, adios muchachos!

Lewis BA, MBA, BCL, LLB.