and it has been highly amusingI love all the outofcontext stuff and the exclusion of the disussion re bite bbies    JSmithDmcdevit user conduct RFC draft  This is the illuminating link beginning with Corrigan onwards httpenwikipediaorgwikiUsertalkJsmithYouTubeLinklistCorriganarticlelink The false accusation of NOR given uncivilly should be addressed It was followed by the report I made at NOR in which he  didnt even try to argue that there was a NOR issue after making the accusation  did not apologize to the accused user for the false accusation Along with discussions at EL it clearly demonstrates that JSmith was aware there  was public opposition both to the project and how it was being conducted and  there was public opposition to how complaints regarding valid links were handledhow other editors were mistreatedcommunity editing was disrespected In spite of this public opposition the project how it was conducted and how editors with objectionscommunity editing were treated continued unchanged  Lets summarize   there was opposition to project itselfhow it was conductedthe project began without consensus against established policy  there was oppostion to how users with objections regarding valid links were treatedthe disruptive effect this had on community editing at numerous articles When politely informed by a copyright holder that there was no copyright issue at numerous articles JSmith Mimsy Dcmcdevit continued to delete the links about which they were aware there was NO copyvio not merely links with suspected copyviothat is a separate issue from the fact that the project was established and conducted without community consensus Although both are user conduct issues there is no policy dispute Copyright policy is clear and they made no attempt to change itdiscuss changing it They cited the EL guideline as standard justification without consensus and directly against consensus after it was made clear at EL that no one agreed with a blanket You Tube ban that links should be evaluated by article editors on a casebycase basis via editorial judgement and consensus The extremely troubling incidents are not the ones in which they deleted suspected copyvios although there is opposition to thatthey do not have consensus and are acting procedurally against both C and ELthe extremely troubling incidents are the ones in which they continued to delete links they KNEW were NOT copyvios  and how they treated other editorsthe community in the process bullying false accusations etcDcmdevits comments to Argyiou JSmiths NOR and disrupted Wikipedia in violation of WPPOINT