User talk:Greyfox

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/NicholasTurnbull

I have filed a Request for Comments regarding my (in)famous New Year's block at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/NicholasTurnbull. You may wish to provide your two cents there.Tommstein 07:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to have filed a view that is friendly to me, but also endorsed a view from Aranda56 that is the opposite (it calls the entire Request for Comments "a revenge or a bad faith RFC"). I don't propose to tell you what to do, I only wish to highlight what seems to be a contradictory stance on the page which you may or may not wish to correct.Tommstein 06:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Call for a vote

Please register your vote on the topic at Mediator is damaged? Thanks, SteveMc 19:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

email

Hello, Greyfox,
I would like to email you and talk to you one-on-one, privately, but you did not provide an email address to Wikipedia. Would you mind emailing me? I would really appreciate it.

Thanks,
CobaltBlueTony 15:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, regarding the 607 issue, you said "Can the bible be harmonized with reality, without apologetics of course." I can send you some information I have compiled on the matter if you would like.--Jeffro77 00:04, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tommstein

Tomm got himself indefinately banned before we even started Arbitration by un-wisely harassing Administrator Nicholas Turnbull. Administrator Turnbull's decision to indefinately block Tommstein has been upheld by the ArbCom already. I must point out that I did want his involvement in the Arbitration process. Duffer 21:49, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cease and Deceast request from GREYFOX.

I here to ask you to remove the indefinete ban from user tommstein. or I will take this up with with whoever I need to to get it undone. Jimbo Whales if necessary. --Greyfox 21:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will except a limited ban if you want. Indefinate ban reeks of abuse of power.--Greyfox 21:11, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't make threats against users who have left, and watch your tone. No-one has a right to edit Wikipedia, and there was a request for comment against Nick which was filed some time ago. There was no clear conclusion arising from this, and despite attempts to reconcile the issue, that remains the case.

Throughout this issue, Nick has been polite and open to discussion, and your little group has done nothing but push POV, make personal remarks, and be incivil and abusive. Don't push any more buttons - of any user - or you may find yourselves banned out of sheer disgust. Rob Church (talk) 01:00, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see cause for either of us to apologise. File as desired. Rob Church (talk) 03:28, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

finaly an agreement.I don't have any thing to lose.--Greyfox 13:45, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good some thing we agree on. I don't have anything to lose. and when was I insulting to Nick. duffer I agree he started it. --24.206.193.170 13:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. You've been rude and obnoxious to me, and you still haven't acknowledged that the behaviour of your little group as a whole has been childish and immature. Take it to ArbCom if you want, I really don't care. I've far more interesting things to do with my time. Rob Church (talk) 15:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greyfox, an answer to your question

Message by Central deleted from page history to remove personal information about another user --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 14:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]