Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Braaad

message: * YES--this is a direct quote---shocking!!
If you can't or won't interact with people in a normal manner (hint: take a look at meta:Don't be a dick and Wikipedia:Civility for some tips on human-human interaction), then get the fuck out. McNeight 00:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NICE commentary from User: McNeight

message: I have just seen MORE of McNeight's attacks against me---and I feel that I should just quit visiting Wikipedia at all. PLEASE cease and desist from sending me any more new messages; I won't respond if nobody posts anything about me. Now that is a great deal for everybody---what do you say?? Actually---don't say anything and I will just disappear. No comments, no sock puppets, no hassles; you just stop posting anything to this page and you will NEVER hear from me again. The fact the McNeight has taken SO much time to vadalize my posts and then write up pages of complaints is rather frieghtening to me. I don't want or need to be harassed in this fashion. braaad 14:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 14 December 2005

message: My only interaction with this subject was regarding a possible sockpuppet, 68.112.201.90 who showed up during RC patrol as blanking sections of Talk:Civil Air Patrol and\or it's subpages.  As this was an anon account and a talk page, I did not place any  or other messages on their talk pages.  As of today I have put possible sockpuppet tags on this IP and Braaad's pages.  xaosflux Talk/CVU 16px 03:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What's your good reason? Grant 08:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: No, it does not say you need one, however the quote does say that it is generally considered uncool unless you have a good reason.  And we are finding it uncool. Grant 18:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Please do not accuse me of harassing you, I am not and it is insulting and libelous. Clearly I have not always agreed with the positions you take, but I have always treated you with respect.  Please show me the same courtesy.  Grant 21:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: RE: Reversions

message: In spite of his rantings on the RfC page, the rules are not "on his side". Specific policies that Braaad has violated include the following:
* Wikipedia:No personal attacks, which he has since resolved with an apology to Linuxbeak but has not resolved with an apology to me.
* Wikipedia:Civility, which, judging by his continued persecution complex and wild accusations about "obnoxious taglines ... added to MY posts", he has yet to resolve. In fact, if we were to assume bad faith for a moment, it would appear that Braaad is attempting to hide from his past so that the next time he attacks, he will be given the same latitude he was given for this episode.
* Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, which he violated to the point of being blocked on 3 separate occasions, as documented in his block log
* Wikipedia:Sock puppet, an official policy which states, in clear and unambiguous language "Do not use multiple accounts to create the illusion of greater support for an issue, to mislead others, or to circumvent a block; nor ask your friends to create accounts to support you."
* Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, which includes:
** Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files, as evidenced by his "ownership" of the IP 68.112.201.90.
** Wikipedia is not a free host or webspace provider, as evidenced by the contributions made by both Braaad as well as 68.112.201.90; he is not interested in making useful contributions to anything other than his user pages. Aside from his "contributions" to the great Mitchell vs. Spaatz vs. Eagle Scout debate, his user pages and miscellaneous talk pages, he has changed a total of two pages, of which one change (Crook) has been reverted. 
** Wikipedia is not a battleground; judging by his continued attacks on editors who cross his path, he seems firmly against building a useful encyclopedia. 
** Wikipedia is not a democracy, by which he seems entitled to express certain views and opinions which are either libelous or just plain wrong.
If Wikipedia is intent on becoming something other than a place for obnoxious know-it-alls to hang around and force feed their opinion to others, then it needs to take complaints such as this seriously. McNeight 02:38, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why [[User:Braaad|Braaad]] Is Wrong. Again. 

message: Just couldn't leave well enough alone, could you. Just had to come back here and brag and push and bluster a bit more, eh? Had to try and taunt me with your "mental superiority", hmm? If you had just shut the fuck up, kept your head down, and actually tried to act like a person instead of a dick, then I really wouldn't have cared. Why are you so wrapped up in what I think? Why are you so obsessed with trying to prove that you are wrong? We even finally have a page, this page, dedicated to just how wrong you are, and you still can't stop talking about how wrong you are. I've given you plenty of rope to hang yourself, and someday the noose will tighten.
The truly pathetic thing about you is that I was more than willing to leave you alone a number of times, so long as you could be a productive member of the Wikipedia society. When originally writing this RfC, an administrator on IRC asked me if I thought what you did merited a permanent ban from Wikipedia. I told him that your recent contributions to Richard Nixon and Crook at the time showed that maybe you were capable of edits that weren't completely self serving. But, again and again, you've demonstrated that the only reason you are here is for yourself.
Is life in Eau Claire, Wisconsin really so dull that you have to chew through the straps at the grin bin and waste time by polishing your... user page? Your largest contributions, as 68.112.201.90, as Braaad and even as T`sitra Yel Darb are still to your own user pages. Somehow you think that Wikipedia is the same as GeoCities and you are entitled to behave as you see fit.
Wikipedia is a community. The focus is not on you or me, but the encyclopedia. Create as many user names as you want, but eventually your "personality" will come through. If you can't or won't interact with people in a normal manner (hint: take a look at meta:Don't be a dick and Wikipedia:Civility for some tips on human-human interaction), then get the fuck out. McNeight 00:18, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why [[User:Braaad|Braaad]] and [[User:T`sitra Yel Darb|T`sitra Yel Darb]] combined are [[pathetic]]. 

message: Considering the new "threat" on my talk page,  could be added to the list. —Wrathchild (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another sock puppet? 

message: Please note that  left another harrassing message on my talk page. —Wrathchild (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More harrassment