Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Zsinj 2

message: The following was copied from the voting page per masssiveego's request. RandyWang (chat me up/fix me up) 12:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

message: Understand the workings of Wikipedia. 
===Zsinjbot===
"Please stop Zsinjbot (at least for now)
Your bot has changed several --helpme-- templates in welcomes that were marked with  and { instead of { . Please halt its progress in doing so so that no more users are erroneously listed as needing help. Jfingers88 02:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In response to your cut + pastes from my user talk page and its archives, I notice that you've happened to find every disgruntled person to have reached my user talk page since March. Is the fact that people who are on the other end of my actions not understanding the reason behind them that motivates you to decide that I am a bad person? In all the cases I could, I attempted to reason with the individuals. However, in a few of them, I found the message to be more of a rant that an attempt at civil discussion. In cases like these, the best course of action is to ignore: exactly what I did. --ZsinjTalk 14:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Failing my Criteria

message: "Please stop Zsinjbot (at least for now)
Your bot has changed several --helpme-- templates in welcomes that were marked with  and { instead of { . Please halt its progress in doing so so that no more users are erroneously listed as needing help. Jfingers88 02:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Zsinjbot

message: Thank you for taking the time to review my edits to a banned user's talk page, but I do not think it was appropriate to accuse me of vandalism simply for a little cleaning up. I am relatively new to Wikipedia, so if there is a policy against deleting clearly outdated information on another user's talk page, please direct me to that information and accept my apologies for the improper edit. But even if you disagree with my edit, placing a vandalism warning template on my own talk page seems a little over the top. All you had to do was politely ask why I edited as I did and I would have been more than happy to give you my reasoning. Please don't bite the newbies. Thanks for your time and happy editing. --Satori Son 19:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Biting the Newbies

message: "You sent me a message saying offensively that i had vandalised the encylopedia. I have not done that. I have not put any racist, bullying, wife beating views. Why are you so offensive. And every time i try and reply to you you threaten me again. You sent me a message with no explanation to what you were referring to, ut simply informing me to not vandlaise the encylopedia and then not to put "nonsese" on the encylcopedia. Why can't you see how offensive and bullying that is. I didn't even know you could send messages and then suddenley from out of the blue you send me a threat, with no explanation. You are a bully. I cannot see how i vandalised the thing in any way. But then you send me an e-mail with no explanation, and no chance of reply. I have not done any vandalism yet i am not able to reply to you. You should not be in admin if you take liberites to send people such an abusive and hurtful message without explanation. Will you ban me for answering back. Are you a bully. I should not be banned simply for trying to communicate with you in reply to an ofensive attention seeking message. I have other computers so don't think you can just destroy me. Are you like the type of people who join the police or become security guards just so they can bully people and pretend they have the law on their side. This message is written by Lonympics. This is not vandalism this is the only way i have of replying to you. Who do you think you are. I predict you had a political dissagreement and decided to missuse your power to tell me i had done something wrong. I know bullies often try to become message board moderators so they can bully people on the internet, did you only become an admin on this website so you could bully people you dissagree with. Don't think you can stop me just by bullying me. You seem eager to let people edit you site in a complimentrary ways but not to point out you have been a bully. This is not vandalising your page this is answering back to your bullying. It is not my fault if if other bullies will back your side straight away. I bet admins of wilpedia will back eachiother up like the police do. Tell me which article i had vandalised before you sent me the message. Tell me that. And don't be so offensive. Will i get banned without reply. If i do that just proves my pointa bout you. You were deeply offensive to me and yet expect me to act like three year old being told off, and not answer back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lonympics (talk • contribs) ."
*I'd like to make a response to this incident in specific. "I have other computers so don't think you can just destroy me." ...threats against Wikipedia. "I have not done any vandalism yet i am not able to reply to you." ...which is instantly invalidated due to this quote being in a reply to me. Lonympics has also been indefinately banned from Wikipedia for incivility and personal attacks, so I find the potential argument against me in this case also invalid. --ZsinjTalk 14:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tutoring Failing to explain a template

message: "I see you're pretty good at finding vandals for me to block, even if they're really obvious, please don't start at the test4 warning, try giving them a test3 before the last warning, warning templates actually work most of the time :). You could also insert template:bv in some cases... --Obli (Talk)? 17:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trigger Happy/Understanding Policy. 

message: Village pump or equavelent posts.
[edit]
--Masssiveego 04:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In response to your cut + pastes from my user talk page and its archives, I notice that you've happened to find every disgruntled person to have reached my user talk page since March. Is the fact that people who are on the other end of my actions not understanding the reason behind them that motivates you to decide that I am a bad person? In all the cases I could, I attempted to reason with the individuals. However, in a few of them, I found the message to be more of a rant that an attempt at civil discussion. In cases like these, the best course of action is to ignore: exactly what I did. --ZsinjTalk 14:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Not active enough with the Wikipedia Community