"
You, like 'Dodo', are wrong.  Notice that 'Dodo' hasn't bothered to EXPLAIN, in  detail, his actions.  This is quite revealing!  He must know that I am a 'new' user:  Only on for about two weeks.  Logic suggests that he should, carefully, EXPLAIN why he did something like deleting my posts, repeatedly, without even as much as asking the community.  After all, why should he be RUDE, as he has been, when he cannot claim that I 'should know' not merely what the rules say, but also the way they are followed.  Well, the simple answer may be that he does this kind of thing a lot:  He may ORIGINALLY have been respectful, but maybe he's developed a practice of 'drive-by-edits'.  He seems to have that reputation!  But as tempting as it may be to assert that, I think his actions are far more detailed and specific, and malicious:  His pattern of deletion of my posts is to delete ALL ALL ALL of my posts, not merely some fraction that (he would argue) violates some rule. So, the 'rule' (actually, the practice) he seems to be showing is this:  ""Do not allow James Dalton Bell to post ANYTHING, on any article, and certainly not on 'jim bell'.""  Will 'Dodo' deny this? So far, he's avoided commenting!  'Dodo' seems to do this by simply finding SOME reason to dislike my post (even just a small part of it, though he doesn't say), and then use this to 'justify' deleting everything.  The best explanation, I  think, is that somebody has put him up to it, and he wasn't careful enough to cover his tracks.  And, a few other non-thinkers back him up.  (Is that called 'sock puppetry' or 'meat puppetry'?)     "