Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Agiantman

message: I have not yet had the time to respond to the groundless and childish allegations here.  I am concerned though that those who have written to support me are also being harrassed with belittling comments after each positive edit or in the outright reversion of their supportive remarks (removal usually done by Gamaliel, a wiki adminstrator!).  Until I have had a chance to formally respond to these silly charges, the bullies here should knock off the harrassment of editors who support me.  BTW -just by reading this page, any neutral observer can plainly see the hypocrisy of the people I am up against.--Agiantman 03:11, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: STOP REMOVING SUPPORTIVE COMMENTS

message: Add you name to this mockery of the democratic process.  Be just like the Nazis, add you name to this tiny group and make your own rules.  It's just like kristallnacht without the effort.   PS  This is an RFC, this is a comment.  To remove this comment is an admission you do not want comments.  If you don't want comments, what is this really about???24.147.97.230 02:26, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: May I recommend Godwin's Law? --kizzle 04:23, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
===Failure to negociate===
The biased "editors" who endorsements are above refuse to negociate for content.  It's their way or no way.  The acts of removal of entire paragraphs of work by them is vandalism.  We are not looking at content that is fictional, but important parts of Ted Kennedy's life and career.  The work on Rosemary Kennedy is the same.  If they want to contribute, fine.  Stop the removal of other's work and do some of your own.  Just because you love the Kennedys does not wash the past clean.  It happened as reported, get used to it.24.147.97.230 22:18, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Join the lynching of a user

message: The biased "editors" who endorsements are above refuse to negociate for content.  It's their way or no way.  The acts of removal of entire paragraphs of work by them is vandalism.  We are not looking at content that is fictional, but important parts of Ted Kennedy's life and career.  The work on Rosemary Kennedy is the same.  If they want to contribute, fine.  Stop the removal of other's work and do some of your own.  Just because you love the Kennedys does not wash the past clean.  It happened as reported, get used to it.24.147.97.230 22:18, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Failure to negociate

message: Note: This page is about me.  Stop reverting my comments. This is my 2nd attempt to insert this message. I have not yet had the time to respond to the groundless and childish allegations here.  I am concerned though that those who have written to support me are also being harrassed with belittling comments after each positive edit or in the outright reversion of their supportive remarks (removal usually done by Gamaliel, a wiki adminstrator!).  Until I have had a chance to formally respond to these silly charges, the bullies here should knock off the harrassment of editors who support me.  BTW -just by reading this page, any neutral observer can plainly see the hypocrisy of the people I am up against.--Agiantman 03:41, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: STOP REMOVING SUPPORTIVE COMMENTS

message: NPOV my foot!  your "project" is a joke.  You lynch Agiantman, while creating an alternative version of history on scum like Kennedy, Byrd, etc. and then claim "neutrality"!  Ha.  Look at JamesMLane's user page and his comments on the "right wing".  Yeah - real neutral source to cast stones at Agiantman...
DEMOCRAT-LEANING??  These guys are past leaning.  They refuse to cooperate or negociate.  Now they try to squelch an editor who does not buy into thier twisted politics.24.147.97.230 03:50, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: WITCH HUNT BY DEMOCRAT-LEANING MODERATORS!

message: leave him alone, and delete this stupid page, just because he doesn't play ball with the rest of the kennedy groupies here on wiki, doens't mean you can start some kind of a witch hunt on someone just expressing their own view, what's next, and iquisition for all people who don't fly the canadian flag on their user page? I suggest we consider blocking whoever created this page in the first place--I-2-d2 03:51, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: bah