User talk:136.183.146.158

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

I still do not believe you will be able to obscure the fact that the quotes are quite damning to the macroevolutionary position. 136.183.146.158 06:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Obscure what "facts"? The quotes are not "damning to macroevolution" - they do, however, reflect on the dishonesty of certain creationists. When one takes what someone said and twist it to suggest it means the opposite of what was said, it only reflects on the person doing the quote-mining. That person is obviously dishonest. Those quotes are not damning to biology, but they are quite damning to certain creationists. I suppose it does support the argument that creationism is not a religious position, because people who engage in such systematic deception are obviously working for the other side. Guettarda 07:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Hi there. Remember me? Still fighting for the truth are we?--ReasonIsBest 04:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please sign in

Ken, please just sign in and use one account. JoshuaZ 03:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Log in. We know it is you.--Filll 03:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I know you CAN edit without logging in. I am not THAT stupid, although you seem to think the rest of us are stupid. My gosh. Give it a rest. Do you know realize what you are facing with your obnoxious F-U attitude?--Filll 03:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Ken, it is disruptive and makes it more difficult to keep track of your edits by sometimes logging in and sometimes not doing so. It would save time for everyone else if you just logged in. JoshuaZ 03:28, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
And I am vulgar? My goodness.--Filll 03:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Fill, You are putting words in my mouth. I said refrain from your vulgarity. I did not call you vulgar. 136.183.146.158 03:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I'm not even going to try to explain this difference between talk messages and emails again because it has been tried multiple times (and note that you will still get talk messages on your IP talk page anyways so your claimed reason doesn't hold much water). As for simply saying that you don't think you are being disruptive- that doesn't make it less disruptive. In fact, WP:SOCK specifically discourages doing what you are doing- fracturing contributions in a way that makes it difficult to keep track of contributions. JoshuaZ 03:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I am not getting as many harrassing emails now that I am not logging in. The proof is in the pudding. Secondly, not logging in is not sockpuppetry. There is nothing on Wikipedia saying not logging in is sockpuppetry. I also am not being disruptive and doing things like "voting twice" vis a vis different usernames. 136.183.146.158 03:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I didn't assert that it was sockpuppetry. I pointed out that it falls within the same sort of thing discouraged under WP:SOCK- splitting up contributions in a confusing fashion. As for why you haven't recieved as many "harrassing emails"(and I really don't understand why you can't learn the difference between emails and talk page messages) that may change as time goes on. Also, I should inform you that over at your RfC there is currently a discussion about asking for a community ban on you editing a large swath of articles. You may want to take a look. JoshuaZ 03:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, I have this page on my watchlist so there is no need to duplicate everything over to my talk page. Replying here will be sufficient. JoshuaZ 03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I will ask you something that has been asked before. What is your purpose here? To bring people to Jesus? To punish the sinners? Condemn the godless to hell? Smite the evil? --Filll 03:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Since you do not seem to know what an email is. I am sure you think this is an email. And guess what, you are still getting them. --Filll 03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Ken, you never received annoying emails, since you never activated that feature on your account. There is an open discussion about your actions which will probably go to AN/I. The fact that you've switched to anon editing at this time seems a little odd timing, wouldn't you say? You are being disruptive. This isn't sockpuppetry but it certainly reeks of hiding yourself to avoid further scrutiny of your actions. *Spark* 03:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

My interpretation is, he wants to be pushy and disruptive but does not want people to realize it is him since about 20 people called him on it in the RFC. However, he still wants to do it. He does not want a debate. He wants to dictate by fiat, he is right, and the rest of us are wrong. Because 'ken is speaking for God. Personally. And arrogantly. Like a Pharisee.--Filll 03:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
This user probably means the "You have new messages (last change)" alerts users get when someone has edited their talk page. AvB ÷ talk 08:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

You have been blocked one week for continuing to disrupt and troll evolution and evolution related articles. IT has been made very clear at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Kdbuffalo 2 that the community is unwilling to tolerate this behaviour. Both of your acknowledged accounts have been blocked. pschemp | talk 19:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Your block has been reset and extending to nine days due to block evasion. -- tariqabjotu 06:25, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../1/3/6/User_talk%7E136.183.146.158.html"