You resorting to dishonesty is disgusting and vile Binksternet For starters dating back to the original discussion back in December 2009 while the user Optigan liked FinancialNorth1 he preferred a cropped version of the fourth photo to which no including PaulH or you for that matter said anything as clearly noted in the discussion As i m saying again for the umpteenth time and as the record showed no decision was made and the discussion ended Paulh or you did not say anything If he wanted the photo then why didn t he continue to press his case then and convince a consensus then I would ve left it at that then but instead he and other editors remained silent I didn t restart the discussion because I assumed that the editors simply lost interest or didn t have the time Furthermore I did not slip in as you disgustingly dishonestly facetiously say I only added that photo because I noticed for the time being that no one had made a decision since the original discussion back in January Again no one did anything for months You and Paulh can not claim you didn t see the change because you made several other edits throughout the article for months Again Paul did not form a consensus prior to the change or continue the discussion where it had left off Once again he instead changed the photo got a consensus from Binksternet The IP editor liked the photo but quoting the editor again Any of the photos in that section FinancialNorth jpg Montgomerystreetsf jpg Federal Reserve Band San Francisco jpg except 2 SanFranciscoEmbarcadero jpg would be fine as a replacement and even the cropped version of 2 is better than the one currently there now Thoughts 64 81 57 93 talk I m going to replace it with FinancialNorth jpg and see what happens The crux of it was that Paulh made the change before even Binksternet approved it or I or other editors could respond Binksternet s abusive little crusade against me shows my point that he and Paul have no interest in perusing collaborative editing efforts Despite my reverts I at least agreed to having a discussion and a photo choosing contest as it were Paulh did not and Binksternet is now acting as some kind of enforcing I don t see Binksternet asking the IP editor in question or other editors to the SF article including Optigan13 have their say either in this He is not apologizing to me and asking that we resume the discussion and consensus something that at least Paulh did earlier Only showing his intentions as pure slander towards me as attempt to have me banned purely because he disagrees with my edits or whatever personal victory he may get by flaming me