:A certain admin will block you if you tell the truth about a certain user's dirty tricks. But she won't do anything to the user who pulled the dirty tricks. She only "punishes" the victim of the dirty tricks. The perpetrator goes scot free. That's "Wikipedia justice", as practiced by admin pschemp.  

Apparently she wants no one to know that Ryulong deleted my request for help on Khoikhoi's talk page, falsely describing my request for help as "vandalism" in his edit summary. Oops! Was it "uncivil" again, for me to tell the truth? If so, then prosecutors in court will never be able to tell the truth about crimes, because it would be an "uncivil" "personal attack" to use words such as "lie", "dishonest", "vandal", "thief", "murderer", "rapist", etc. The judge would get too upset by such "uncivil comments". Come to think of it, every time an admin describes a user's action as "vandalism", or a user as a "vandal", that's an improper "personal attack", according to pschemp's logic. If pschemp treats people equally (not likely), then she better block all the admins who make those "personal attacks" of describing a particular user's behavior as "vandalism". And she better block Ryulong for using that "personal attack" against me in his false edit summaries.  



Toxicity label: other