Full Version: Giano Blocked Again
See Giano's talk page, block log.
QUOTE(C H @ Tue 1st July 2008, 8:18pm) 
Lol look at all those blocks though, and he's never had one longer than 48 hours that I can see, and the blocks kept being unblocked/shortened, so they have made allowances for him which they wouldn't have made for other users, whoce blocks would have increased in length.
QUOTE(wikiwhistle @ Tue 1st July 2008, 3:30pm)
QUOTE(C H @ Tue 1st July 2008, 8:18pm)
Lol look at all those blocks though, and he's never had one longer than 48 hours that I can see, and the blocks kept being unblocked/shortened, so they have made allowances for him which they wouldn't have made for other users, whoce blocks would have increased in length.
Actually, he was blocked once for 31 hours by FT2. Had this not been a block by an arbitrator, he probably would have been unblocked, as he normally is within an hour of being blocked. The preferential treatment he receives is unreal. The vast majority of his blocks last 3 hours or less. And 3 hour blocks are completely pointless. They serve only to piss him off more, I'm sure. They certainly don't allow sufficient time to cool off, and they obviously serve no meaningful purpose to change his behavior, considering the devs will soon have to create a second page for his log. What purpose they do serve is to be a slap in the face to every editor who has been blocked for 24 or more hours for incivility, personal attacks and harassment, receiving blocks of greater duration for subsequent offenses up to a month or more, while Giano gets blocks of 3 hours followed by blocks of 3 hours.
A clear example of the elite and just how important it is to be prolific in your content contributions if you have a shameful inability to play nice with others.
[RE-EDIT] Looking at the details of this situation, however, he made a good point in the edit preceding the blocking edit.
before someone adds the tag (And again), the block has now been extended to 24 hours. For what the new blocking admins terms "further incivility" (which I'm not sure about, tbh) *sighs* (AND NOW 48?)
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 4:27pm)
before someone adds the tag (And again), the block has now been extended to 24 hours. For what the new blocking admins terms "further incivility" (which I'm not sure about, tbh) *sighs*
It appears that Avruch was being facetious and Giano took it to be more of a serious criticism of ArbCom. Am I misinterpreting? This would be more obvious to me if I knew where Giano stood on the issue at hand... I'm off to find that out now.
Giano hates ArbCom. Big time. He's challenged them over the IRC issue, and is frustrated by lack of movement since the case.
Well, if there was ever any question about whether User:William M. Connolley is a self-important idiot, that question is now settled.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 4:35pm)
Giano hates ArbCom. Big time. He's challenged them over the IRC issue, and is frustrated by lack of movement since the case.
I read the rest of his talk page. Holy incivility, Batman! Well, he claims the blocking edit was sarcasm. I find that hard to believe, but whatever. I'd bet good money that his block is lifted well before his 48 hours are up.
I have a very good impression of Avruch and I think it is very far off the mark for Giano to attack him this way. His opposition to the ArbCom is very valuable, but he needs to choose his targets better and go about his criticism in a less overtly hostile manner.
Sorry, never mind. I was misunderstanding the log.
QUOTE
* 17:11, 1 July 2008 Avraham (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 hour ‎ (Original 3 hour block set to expire in 1 hour)
* 17:06, 1 July 2008 Geogre (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (unblock to change duration)
* 16:27, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (re-repeated incivility)
* 16:26, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (oh dear)
* 16:20, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 24 hours ‎ (repeated incivility)
* 16:17, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (to extend block)
* 14:59, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 hours ‎ (Personal attacks or harassment of other users)
* 17:06, 1 July 2008 Geogre (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (unblock to change duration)
* 16:27, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (re-repeated incivility)
* 16:26, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (oh dear)
* 16:20, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 24 hours ‎ (repeated incivility)
* 16:17, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (to extend block)
* 14:59, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 hours ‎ (Personal attacks or harassment of other users)
Looks like it is down to 1 hour!
QUOTE(LaraLove @ Tue 1st July 2008, 8:20pm)
Looking at the details of this situation, however, he made a good point in the edit preceding the blocking edit.
He certainly did.
Funny how all roads lead to FT2 nowadays.
*sighs* It's like watching a car wreck in slow motion.
Geogre's probably right on them (I want to say possibly right, but that'd be wishy-washy), but god knows you don't come running in, and undo the actions of another admin unilaterally.
This is probably ArbCom bound (like that August Authority doesn't have enough on their plate?)
edit: And Giano uses the unprotection of his page to launch yet another invective filled missle. Hoo boy.
Geogre's probably right on them (I want to say possibly right, but that'd be wishy-washy), but god knows you don't come running in, and undo the actions of another admin unilaterally.
This is probably ArbCom bound (like that August Authority doesn't have enough on their plate?)
edit: And Giano uses the unprotection of his page to launch yet another invective filled missle. Hoo boy.
QUOTE(prospero @ Tue 1st July 2008, 5:07pm)
Sorry, never mind. I was misunderstanding the log.
OMG! Who called this shit? George has a conflict of interest and his comments on the talk page are no more helpful. I can't believe this isn't on AN/I. So George unblocked to change duration, then failed to reblock, so Avraham reblocked for 1 hour, which is basically to restore the original 3 hour block set 2 hours ago.
What a shameful joke. A series of indiscretions over a extended length of time for some leads to stern warnings and/or sanctions, to others tiny little blocks of 3 hours, and for yet others 9 month bans, and for yet other others indefinite blocks. Admins making bad blocks over emotions, other admins making COI unblocks with misleading summaries. Stupid, stupid, stupid (in the words of Giano, of course).
Orangemarlin should just cite Giano as a reason he should be let off the hook. Precedents, folks. Precedents.
And we have WHEELWAR! Repeat, we have WHEELWAR!
(WMC just re-blocked for 48 hours).
Did I say a car crash? More like two tanker trains, both filled with Nitroglycerine)
(WMC just re-blocked for 48 hours).
Did I say a car crash? More like two tanker trains, both filled with Nitroglycerine)
WMC upped it to 48h again!
Someone like Giano, a long-term heavy contributor, shouldn't be blocked without administrative consensus. They should take it to one of the AN pages and work out an appropriate length, if any, and also work out some kind of gameplan about how to handle this stuff in the future.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 9:20pm)
Geogre's probably right on them (I want to say possibly right, but that'd be wishy-washy), but god knows you don't come running in, and undo the actions of another admin unilaterally.
Why not?
This is a recently-acquired dysfunction of the WP culture. People used to be unblocked all the time. It wasn't "wheel-warring." Now we have this idea that administrators must present a united front against the rest of the community. In this paradigm, it is the blocking administrator who binds everyone else unilaterally.
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 1st July 2008, 5:29pm)
Someone like Giano, a long-term heavy contributor, shouldn't be blocked without administrative consensus. They should take it to one of the AN pages and work out an appropriate length, if any, and also work out some kind of gameplan about how to handle this stuff in the future.
I thought ArbCom had agreed to only allow a select few Administrators enforce that remedy after the last brouhaha?
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 1st July 2008, 5:29pm)
Someone like Giano, a long-term heavy contributor, shouldn't be blocked without administrative consensus. They should take it to one of the AN pages and work out an appropriate length, if any, and also work out some kind of gameplan about how to handle this stuff in the future.
I'm sure this is all explained in the sanctions against him, as far as how long to block and such. There is a matter, of course, of being certain there is incivility, rather than over-sensitivity or a misunderstanding of sarcasm. In this case, I think there was genuine incivility, even disregarding the blocking comment, the first edit from him on his current talk page.
Has it made it to AN or AN/I yet?
QUOTE(LaraLove @ Wed 2nd July 2008, 7:34am)
QUOTE(everyking @ Tue 1st July 2008, 5:29pm)
Someone like Giano, a long-term heavy contributor, shouldn't be blocked without administrative consensus. They should take it to one of the AN pages and work out an appropriate length, if any, and also work out some kind of gameplan about how to handle this stuff in the future.
I'm sure this is all explained in the sanctions against him, as far as how long to block and such. There is a matter, of course, of being certain there is incivility, rather than over-sensitivity or a misunderstanding of sarcasm. In this case, I think there was genuine incivility, even disregarding the blocking comment, the first edit from him on his current talk page.
Has it made it to AN or AN/I yet?
I checked - and no.
QUOTE
I agree with Tex and Geogre: who is Giano hurting by letting off steam on his own page when he's blocked? Do you have to come here to be offended? What is that, some kind of compulsion?
Final message from Giano via Bishonen: Giano doesn't care about his page being protected. If Avruch can attack him and he can't reply—then he's not interested in posting on Wikipedia. Please don't revert this message, I'm un-breaking my wikibreak to post it. Bishonen 21:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Final message from Giano via Bishonen: Giano doesn't care about his page being protected. If Avruch can attack him and he can't reply—then he's not interested in posting on Wikipedia. Please don't revert this message, I'm un-breaking my wikibreak to post it. Bishonen 21:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
It seems I can now edit my own page without cencorship, albeit for a very short time no doubt. What a pity, but then hardly surprising this whole very nasty incident arose from a comment concerning Durova and FT2 . Well my friends and foes you have the Wikipedia you deserve. Giano (talk) 21:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)Indeed we do. Go well, Giano. Vaya pues, SqueakBox 21:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Final message from Giano
QUOTE(prospero @ Tue 1st July 2008, 10:40pm)
QUOTE
I agree with Tex and Geogre: who is Giano hurting by letting off steam on his own page when he's blocked? Do you have to come here to be offended? What is that, some kind of compulsion?
Final message from Giano via Bishonen: Giano doesn't care about his page being protected. If Avruch can attack him and he can't reply—then he's not interested in posting on Wikipedia. Please don't revert this message, I'm un-breaking my wikibreak to post it. Bishonen 21:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Final message from Giano via Bishonen: Giano doesn't care about his page being protected. If Avruch can attack him and he can't reply—then he's not interested in posting on Wikipedia. Please don't revert this message, I'm un-breaking my wikibreak to post it. Bishonen 21:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
It seems I can now edit my own page without cencorship, albeit for a very short time no doubt. What a pity, but then hardly surprising this whole very nasty incident arose from a comment concerning Durova and FT2 . Well my friends and foes you have the Wikipedia you deserve. Giano (talk) 21:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)Indeed we do. Go well, Giano. Vaya pues, SqueakBox 21:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Final message from Giano
FGS: Forget the drama, I made a comment concerning FT2 and Durova http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=222909051, which is a sin akin to farting during mass. It is a pity, but there you are can't be helped.
Earlier this evening after months of shouting and me being blocked they finally banned the dreadful CounterRevolutionary http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=217340644 - remember it was my shouting on his page that made Rockpocket ban me a few days ago, yet it seems I was right, yet again. He is, though, as they know just the tip of a very large iceberg. To be honest with you all, one can get tired of all of this, head banging, so I deserve a rest from it all, also perhaps they deserve a rest from me.
It's funny to see all these admins I have never heard of on my page getting their few moments of wiki-fame. It's odd isn't it, I am always the one accused of drama, yet this is exactly what the Arbcom planned with their daft civility sanction, somehow though I doubt they thought I would survive so long - I wonder if FT2 has the same talent for survival? All very interesting. One day I shall have to write a book - but would anyone believe it?
Shit! here comes the cavalry http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=222949107, beam me up Scottie - fast!
Giano
This went wheel war at the highlighted bit, didn't it?
Whoa...
I'm honestly surprised this isn't at RFAR already.
QUOTE
# 21:21, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (restoring valid civility block)
# 21:21, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (to restore)
# 21:11, 1 July 2008 Avraham (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 hour ‎ (Original 3 hour block set to expire in 1 hour)
# 21:06, 1 July 2008 Geogre (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (unblock to change duration)
# 20:27, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (re-repeated incivility)
# 20:26, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (oh dear)
# 20:20, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 24 hours ‎ (repeated incivility)
# 20:17, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (to extend block)
# 18:59, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 hours ‎ (Personal attacks or harassment of other users)
# 21:21, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (to restore)
# 21:11, 1 July 2008 Avraham (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 1 hour ‎ (Original 3 hour block set to expire in 1 hour)
# 21:06, 1 July 2008 Geogre (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (unblock to change duration)
# 20:27, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 48 hours ‎ (re-repeated incivility)
# 20:26, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (oh dear)
# 20:20, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 24 hours ‎ (repeated incivility)
# 20:17, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) unblocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" ‎ (to extend block)
# 18:59, 1 July 2008 William M. Connolley (Talk | contribs) blocked "Giano II (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 3 hours ‎ (Personal attacks or harassment of other users)
Whoa...
QUOTE
Administrators really shouldn't be WP:WHEEL warring over blocks. --Dragon695 (talk) 21:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Meanwhile, in these circumstances, strict civility would be good William M. Connolley (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Meanwhile, in these circumstances, strict civility would be good William M. Connolley (talk) 21:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm honestly surprised this isn't at RFAR already.
I've posted to ANI, with a question about how much leeway Giano should be given - Giano knows that continuing his poor behaviour will get him blocked, and its only by the grace of his tenure and collected supporters he's still editing...
QUOTE(Sceptre @ Tue 1st July 2008, 6:08pm)
I've posted to ANI, with a question about how much leeway Giano should be given - Giano knows that continuing his poor behaviour will get him blocked, and its only by the grace of his tenure and collected supporters he's still editing...
I sense a civil war abrewin'. But would Giano make a good Robert E. Lee? Or Cromwell?
We're about to find out!
QUOTE
We've got a nasty situation where Giano has been blocked for 48 hours, for violating his arbcom sanction twice while blocked. Please don't wheel war on this issue though. I'd also like to state that I'm very disappointed with the support Giano's getting for his behaviour when it's clearly unacceptable (i.e. profanity and demands for desysopping). How much is enough, exactly? If he were any other editor, he would've been gone weeks ago. Sceptre (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Now that's what I call "stirring the shit". OTT
It's in the remit of an editor to ask for desysopping, whether it happens or not is another matter. Wikipedia gets more like a junta of generals by the day.
QUOTE(The Joy @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:12pm)
QUOTE(Sceptre @ Tue 1st July 2008, 6:08pm)
I've posted to ANI, with a question about how much leeway Giano should be given - Giano knows that continuing his poor behaviour will get him blocked, and its only by the grace of his tenure and collected supporters he's still editing...
I sense a civil war abrewin'. But would Giano make a good Robert E. Lee? Or Cromwell?
We're about to find out!
That'd make two civil wars on Wikipedia - the ID war, and the Giano war. And the king will lose again, silly man (stupid git).
QUOTE(Gold heart @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:21pm)
QUOTE
We've got a nasty situation where Giano has been blocked for 48 hours, for violating his arbcom sanction twice while blocked. Please don't wheel war on this issue though. I'd also like to state that I'm very disappointed with the support Giano's getting for his behaviour when it's clearly unacceptable (i.e. profanity and demands for desysopping). How much is enough, exactly? If he were any other editor, he would've been gone weeks ago. Sceptre (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Now that's what I call "stirring the shit". OTT :wacko:
It's in the remit of an editor to ask for desysopping, whether it happens or not is another matter. Wikipedia gets more like a junta of generals by the day.
Yes, but it gets really annoying when he does it nearly every week.
Funny, everyone seems to ignore the wheel war....
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 3:22pm)
Funny, everyone seems to ignore the wheel war....
I'm not suggesting this, but maybe actually hauling one of these Giano wheel wars before RFAR would get them to stop?
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:22pm)
Funny, everyone seems to ignore the wheel war....
Looking a Giano's block log, it looks like William Connelley is in a "wheel war" with himself, poor chap.
QUOTE(Sceptre @ Tue 1st July 2008, 6:22pm)
That'd make two civil wars on Wikipedia - the ID war...
lolwut?
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 6:22pm)
Funny, everyone seems to ignore the wheel war....
That is strange. I've seen arguments where just another admin unblocking while the blocking admin was away be accused of "wheel warring" and long AN/I drama following. Is "blocking Giano, unblocking Giano, reblocking Giano, repeat" just gotten so old no one cares anymore? Not at all fair to the person who's blocked at all.
Giano,
Edit articles on WP.
Right WP wrongs via writing about what and who is wrong with WP on W-R.
It works much better that way. This site's admins let its users use their bullshit detectors and present the facts for the masses to decide.
W-R is the Open Source equivalent to all those WP Super Sekret ShootEmOnSight lists.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and Jimbo and Crew pull down the shades when it suits them.
W-R has 24/7/365 sunlamps going....for all WP'ians to see, not just the nobility.
Edit articles on WP.
Right WP wrongs via writing about what and who is wrong with WP on W-R.
It works much better that way. This site's admins let its users use their bullshit detectors and present the facts for the masses to decide.
W-R is the Open Source equivalent to all those WP Super Sekret ShootEmOnSight lists.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and Jimbo and Crew pull down the shades when it suits them.
W-R has 24/7/365 sunlamps going....for all WP'ians to see, not just the nobility.
You know what, fuck this. Time to step off this break.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 10:38pm)
You know what, fuck this. Time to step off this break.
i love it when you get riled up, fozz. Go get 'em! whatever side you're on, lol.
QUOTE(LaraLove @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:32pm)
QUOTE(Sceptre @ Tue 1st July 2008, 6:22pm)
That'd make two civil wars on Wikipedia - the ID war...
lolwut?
Mostly the fallout from RFAR/OM
ArbCom case filed.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:22pm)
ArbCom case filed.
ArbCom should be a party in this case, not its judge.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 2:20pm)
*sighs* It's like watching a car wreck in slow motion.
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 1st July 2008, 7:23pm)
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:22pm)
ArbCom case filed.
ArbCom should be a party in this case, not its judge.
Bwuh? for wheel-warring? Sorry Proabivouac, don't follow.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:31pm)
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 1st July 2008, 7:23pm)
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:22pm)
ArbCom case filed.
ArbCom should be a party in this case, not its judge.
Bwuh? for wheel-warring? Sorry Proabivouac, don't follow.
Arbcom botched the remedy the first time, giving admins a blank chueque to block Giano for trivialities. Yes, some other users would have been escalated right out of the park by now, but on the other hand the incidents for which Giano has been blocked since the IRC case have mostly been trivial.
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:31pm)
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Tue 1st July 2008, 7:23pm)
QUOTE(SirFozzie @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:22pm)
ArbCom case filed.
ArbCom should be a party in this case, not its judge.
Bwuh? for wheel-warring? Sorry Proabivouac, don't follow.
Step back a bit, Fozzie…ArbCom created this situation with its ill-advised remedy, critics of which predicted this very result. Now step forward again: the block was for Giano's complaints on a page of a sitting arbitrator, FT2.
giano calls others idiots.
Gerard and JzG call people "twats", "c*nts", and to go "Fuck off".
how come they don't get blocked?
giano's there to write an encyclopedia. The other 2 sure ain't (look at their edit histories, lol)
Gerard and JzG call people "twats", "c*nts", and to go "Fuck off".
how come they don't get blocked?
giano's there to write an encyclopedia. The other 2 sure ain't (look at their edit histories, lol)
QUOTE(Piperdown @ Wed 2nd July 2008, 12:39am)
giano calls others idiots.
Gerard and JzG call people "twats", "c*nts", and to go "Fuck off".
how come they don't get blocked?
giano's there to write an encyclopedia. The other 2 sure ain't (look at their edit histories, lol)
Perhaps JzG hasn't been blocked as that user id hasn't edited for a month and a half. Wonder what sock he is using - he can't be retired as he hasn't come back yet.
QUOTE(dogbiscuit @ Tue 1st July 2008, 11:44pm)
Perhaps JzG hasn't been blocked as that user id hasn't edited for a month and a half. Wonder what sock he is using - he can't be retired as he hasn't come back yet.
Someone needs to check the big-boob articles and find him.
You know, I get the feeling this is going to get fully accepted to turn it into another case against Giano. I wish I hadn't made the suggestion, now.
If anything, this might finally result in getting WMC knocked down a peg, something that should have happened at least 3 years ago.
QUOTE(badlydrawnjeff @ Tue 1st July 2008, 8:20pm)
If anything, this might finally result in getting WMC knocked down a peg, something that should have happened at least 3 years ago.
Sad that Geogre and Giano have to go down along with WMC, though.
QUOTE(The Joy @ Wed 2nd July 2008, 12:33am)
QUOTE(badlydrawnjeff @ Tue 1st July 2008, 8:20pm)
If anything, this might finally result in getting WMC knocked down a peg, something that should have happened at least 3 years ago.
Sad that Geogre and Giano have to go down along with WMC, though.
I see no reason for Geogre to be desysoped. Even if we grant this self-serving notion than administrators shouldn't undo the actions of other administrators, and that Giano should not have been unblocked, his unblock was merely reversed and damaged nothing.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.