User talk:Nick/Archive9

Red talk page?

Why have you, an admin, got a red, sneaky-protected talk page, with all the past edits hidden away somewhere in a moved page? I'm assuming there's some technical issue or you've been on the wrong end of harassment, but if it's merely that you don't wish to communicate you shouldn't be an admin. --kingboyk 16:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering leaving, but the breathtaking stupidity of the people who would be left thinking they are in charge prompted a bit of a rethink. You might be included in that, I'm not entirely sure yet. Nick 16:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My point is merely and entirely that if you wish to use your admin powers you have to be open to communication. Throwing my comment back as an insult doesn't help. If you wish to remain here but with a protected user talk page I suggest you either refrain from using the sysop bit or resign it. --kingboyk 16:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop namecalling

Please stop your namecalling. Disagree if you will, but do it in a civil manner. People are raising what they see as legitimate concerns with the behavior of an editor. Your dismissing it as pathetic whining is not helpful. Take a break or something, if that would help. Friday (talk) 16:36, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Might not be helpful, but it's true. If you don't like it, why not take a break ? Nick 16:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Look Nick, I know we dont get on and you could go as far as to say we're enemies but please stop being uncvil at ANI, at the end of the day its not helping anything. . — Rlest (formerly Qst) 16:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who were you?

Did you change your user name a bunch of times? Is there a log of this somewhere? More generally, how can I view the name change history for a user?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 16:56, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not me - one change, from Heligoland to Nick. Nick 16:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:You pillock

I will not apologize. He has been uncivil and dramatic. His wikibreak is the best thing he can do for Wikipedia. Please remain civil and assume good faith. I take your message as a personal attack. --Boricuaeddie 18:21, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It might be better if you take it for a stern warning that if not heeded, will result in you being blocked. Nick 18:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA opposes

This has been discussed a few times, including [1]. The general agreement--which, I withheld from engaging in what was being discussed until this issue was resolved, mind you--is that, while most people think it is a ludicrous reason to oppose, there is in fact nothing wrong with it, nothing disruptive at all about it, and it is perfectly acceptable. In fact, two other admins have already made the same threat as you have and the backed off when they realized their error. Please do not be so rash. Kurt Weber 18:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My warning stands. I don't particularly care about what you say in your RfA opposes, unless they lead to disruption, as is the case at present. If you were to be blocked, it wouldn't be for what you said, but for the effect it has on the community, which is something you seriously need to look at. Nick 18:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nick, your warning, along with some of your other recent behavior, is frankly ridiculous. If other people choose to get bent out of shape over Kurt's reasons for opposing, this is their choice, and he can't really be blamed for it. I advise you to take a break or something, apparently the stress is getting to you. Friday (talk) 18:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Friday, I'll warn a disruptive editor as I see fit. Nick 19:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is completely unreasonable to claim that I am "disrupting" anything just because one user is so thin-skinned that he throws a hissy fit and hurls insults when he sees a legitimate contribution to a discussion that he dislikes--especially when there is already an established consensus that I am in fact not being disruptive. If anything, you and Rlest are being disruptive by choosing to make a big deal out of this. Everyone else is quite capable of ignoring it if they don't like it. Kurt Weber 19:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's also completely unreasonable to claim users should just ignore your comments if they dislike them. Wikipedia is a collaborative project, you need to reconsider what you are saying, just as Rlest and other editors need to consider their responses to your contributions. Nick 19:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]