", 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Pathoschild, I could kiss you a thousand times. Thank you for for smoothing out the blocking issue, and, especially, for hearing me!

As to arbitration: well, it sounds nice in theory, but I worry the actual good it'd do and how I'd probably be the one to get smacked down. At the risk of sounding, er, slightly paranoid, my style apparently makes me a magnet for All Bad Things and there is not much I can do about it. It seems as if Dominick can do and say anything, repeatedly, and nothing happens, but I get admonished (or blocked!) for sarcasm and things I didn't even do. 

While I was blocked (which incident is forgiven): in the ""external links"" section at the entry ""Rosary,"" he replaced this link with this one, calling the former a ""monograph site"" (by which he means, apparently, that there is one person who oversees thing  even though I have SIX people and he has been informed of this. If there's anything in the rules about monographs, I'd like to see what the heck Dominick is talking about). Malachias111 (my ""meatpuppet"") had my back, but man, oh, man!

I just want for him to leave me ALONE, to quit libelling me and my life's work, and to stop taking down perfectly relevant, helpful, and informative links just because he hates traditional Catholicism. Dominick is a ""POV Warrior"" with a a neo-conservative Catholic POV who engages in harrassment and a soft form of ""vandalism"" (though I don't think his purpose is to imperil the integrity of the encyclopedia, he is removing perfectly good content for no good reason  and lying about that content in the process). If he wants to go through and put the line ""a traditional Catholic website"" after any link to my site, then fine. But removing the links, replacing them (esp. with lesser quality links), lying about them (he says they're a ""blog,"" ""POV,"" ""monograph,"" 'linkspam,"" etc.), slandering me and the site in his edit summary notes, etc.  I can't just let him do that.

If you can give me decent odds that I will get a fair ""hearing,"" if the abritrators will read my RfC and the associated discussion page, click on the links, and look into what I have been saying, then I would very much like to move forward; but, if the odds say it's going to be a matter of their looking at style over substance (e.g., seeing my admitted sarcasm after months of weirdness and not looking into the reasons for it), then , I dunno 'cause I can't take another ""Oh, great, he wins again!"" type situation. 

I will try to be more civil as it is apparently defined, but if it weren't for sarcasm, I don't know how I'd survive this stuff. If you knew what I'd been tempted to say, you'd think I were Mother Theresa LOL 

In any case, I thank you for your attention. It's good to know I am not being totally ignored in all this and that someone out there is actually hearing me. No, it's beyond ""good""; it is a RELIEF as this has been really upsetting and time-consuming for me. I appreciate your time and know it can't be any fun for you either; I make my own self sick repeating my defense over and over LOL. Wish I didn't have to. 

I saw earlier, though, that there are things going on in your ""real life"" that were, at least, to take you away from administrating until after Christmas. I hope that, whatever those events may be, they are happy ones. Assuming the odds are decent and this goes forward at all, if bringing all this up to an arbitration committee is too time-consuming or distracting, it can wait 'til after Christmas when you have more time. Sounds as though you have stuff going on...  20:07"