" February 2009 (UTC)

 Well, hope the floor didn't hurt. But your characterization of my attitude and what I respect and don't is to say the least dubious. Did it occur to you that I didn't attend your schools, have different experiences, different parents, and can think for myself? There is plenty of room for differences in interpretation, as anyone that has mediated flame wars here, as I have can tell you. One cranky old editor spouting off does NOT make for a battle. OTOH, similar frank opinions have almost universally in the past resulted in a good working relationship, a clear communication, and about 3/4ths of the time, resulted in a new Wikifriend. So piffle to WP:CIVyou're not looking at the context, nor the intent of the context for that guideline. Being polite can in fact be counterproductive and a time waste, a matter of judgmentmine, as the observer. Take Quiddity (who signed up at page top for example) who once demonstrated a unbelievable tendency to pro-offer unwarranted judgments and unsolicited advice. Ultimately, I had to get firm with him and sent this, which he threatened to post, SO I DID. Nothing there to be ashamed of, you see. Bottom line... there are some people in this world that need rapped along side the ear to get their attention. There are others that need to have their toes stepped on, UNTIL THEY APOLOGIZE. Both those types benefit some by being jerked up by the shorthairs. Failing all else, it makes me feel better, and communicates at least one person, however crazy they may think me, has less than steller appreciation for their actions as they impact othersnormally others time. I really don't get excised much here about anything else. Endless editing and all that, after all.Sooooo, Thanks for the appeal to my vanity, but I suggest in the future you counsel people to examine whether a situation is ongoing, escalating, or one time episode of venting. I spent 2-1/2 years here acting as a mediator myself, and would never have considered involving myself in an isolated message based case. Not sensible. Call it justifiable road rage if you like—a real world situation here in cyber space, and  at least I cleaned up the vulgarity of what I had written in the first three drafts, to make my loathing judgment of his lazy rape of hundreds of pages plain. THAT is where I put my loyalty and focus. NOT on one of thousands of arguable interpretation of various guidelines and policies. If your INTERPRETATION of WP:CIV prohibits any colorful idiom or addressing a dumbshit-thing-to-do as a dumbshit act, I'm definitely done here. I'm floored that you haven't the imagination to understand that— save for the hyperbole about kicking ass, a deliberate attempt to indicate how poorly I viewed the 5-6 hours a day of well over six weeks of effort fixing his rape pogrom allegedly following guidelines — nor the fact that you were all being busy-bodies making much ado about nothing. One of the most reprehensible facts about contributing here is that there is a total insensitivity to the leisure time our contributors make, particularly by 'blithely accepting actions', one way or another, deleting their hard work and effort, which is about as personal an attack as one can make... Show me where NPA THE LEAST SENSITIVE to that VERY REAL, VERY PERSONAL virtual 'slap in the face'.  And fools wonder why we have editor retention rate problems! Wake the fuck up. THAT IS A REAL WORLD PROBLEM, not my slight episode of 'hitting' to administer a lesson in courtesy to others. (Call me twisted, but a single discourtesy to me  administered to make the point is properly due those who exercise the ultimate discourtesies, really without due process. Making 180 article pages into redirects without involving the community at large in the decision is to me, WP:BOLD applied way over the top. AFD or MFD should have been invoked, at the least. Not one talk page and three or four editors without a direct attempt to re-involve the originator of same articles, or their major contributors. BOTH THOSE badly need a quorum count provision, but I digress, the digression.) Those articles nearly 200 some were something apparently dozens put up... involving hundreds of man-hours and were well crafted. Oh, they needed some cites for a few fannish statements of cause and effect, but the necessity of that is itself doubtful in cultural articles about recently produced intellectual efforts. WP:AGF should be sufficient for such a report making a statement like ""this is the first (last) episode character/actor-so-and-so appeared in, and so forth. Then there's the whole joke of notability for such pages, which is hand