Knowledge:Requests for comment/DotSix

2416:. I have posted a notice that arbitration is being discussed on the "talk page" of each of the IP addresses that has so far been identified in this RfC as being used by Dot-Six. The template for an IP address talk page contains a good instruction that if any comments are made that are not applicable to a person using an anonymous IP address, they are advised to create an account or sign in. Anyone who is not Dot-Six can avoid being blocked by creating an account. (For that matter, anyone who is Dot-Six can avoid being blocked by IP address. However, that is hypothetical.) 1905:

blocked. An anonymous editor who violates the 3RR rule cannot be effectively blocked. Since Knowledge (unlike much of Usenet) is not an anarchy, there must be situations in which the use of anonymity has to be checked. My own suggestion is that there should be a feature allowing an article that has previously been disrupted by anonymous edits more than 3 times in 24 hours to be permanently protected from anonymous edits without the drastic extent of full protection. That is my opinion.

2183:. It was pointed out to him that, although Wiki policy requires that all points of view be mentioned fairly, it explicitly rejects the idea that all points of view have to be treated equally. He responded by editing the policy page itself in an attempt to unilaterally reverse the policy. He didn't get away with it. DotSix's claim, in this Response, that he did not ever assert that all points of view have to be treated equally is dishonest. 2491:

namecalling, (3) repeating the edits that were rejected and repeating the behavior for which he was admonished. This is behavior of someone who doesn't believe that the rules apply to him and has no interest in the thoughts of anyone else. (I'm frankly just amazed that any of you could think at this point that his behavior is going to be any different in the next two days than it has been for the last month.)

2155:. By the way, Rhobite was under no obligation to restore either of those remarks anyway. When he is reverting someone else's improper deletion, he is entitled to revert it whole. He does not have to hunt through it looking for sub-parts that would be proper if entered by themselves. When DotSix, or any of us, violates a policy, we put all parts of that same edit at risk of reversion. 2495:

already. He's just prolonging the dispute and enjoying the attention. You all are just playing into his hands. Also, please remember, it is not really true that you should always err on the side of being more tolerant rather than less. There is a price paid with each day that he is allowed on Knowledge: Productive time is wasted. --

2238:, or it was created as a fake piece of Knowledge jargon to be used in this RfC. Either way, he certainly ought to that the project namespace is to be used for policies and the like, so ought to know by now that it's not a place for rhetoric, nor as a vehicle for complaining that his own POV isn't getting enough weight. It's been 648:, claiming that it is a "logical fallacy". When he uses talk pages, he accuses other editors of using logical fallacies, of being "obscurantists", of being "vandals", and of violating the NPOV policy. When informed that most users oppose his edits, he responds that this is fallacious reasoning, "argumentum ad numerum". 2393:

advocate. I would also be happy for him to take this to mediation - I think that he should be the one to do this, rather than us, because it is he who is in the minority. But if he doesn't want to do this, and he continues to be a blight on the editing of the epistemology pages, I will take him to arbitration myself.

104:) note the similarity of annotation to 172.195.53.33: no personal note except a simple IP address, clearly a platform from which to launch messages. Also, note his 7/23/05 annotation "...in accord with the actual state of affairs" is terminology used by 67.182.157.6 and no other party to the dispute. 2392:

My point above was to .6; don't get me wrong, if someone here were to take this to arbitration they would have my full support. I am just ensuring that .6 knows about the process and what his options are. Since his opinion has received virtually no support, I strongly recommend that he should seek an

2212:

DotSix says that his opponents argue thus: "P must be true, because it is the opinion of the majority here." In fact, no one has made such a ridiculous claim. Rather, we have argued "P is not commonly accepted, therefore, to be consistent with Wiki policy, it should be mentioned fairly, but it should

2189:

Yes, he did. It was a discussion that concerned the philosopher Ramsey, as Banno noted; but what it concerned is irrelevant. What matters is that DotSix effectively shut it off by archiving it. This point seems to be lost on DotSix. Indeed, he seems to think that whether or not he mentioned Ramsey in

2106:

being asked several times to do so. Ramsey is the originator and main advocate of the redundancy theory of truth that .6 used as the basis for his POV dispute. So, in order to solve the dispute in good faith, discussion of Ramsey would be essential. Instead, .6 failed to address the issue and hid the

1328:

23:34, August 5, 2005 (UTC) . Like Asbestos, my involvement has been limited. But I do from time to time work on the Epistemology and Truth articles, and I think it fair to say that DotSix's reverts there have long since gone beyond what one might call reasonable disagreement. Aside from misusing the

1926:

I had previously agreed with Asbestos that Dot-Six was probably only a troll. I have deleted some of my language from the above because I think that "only a troll" may be a misnomer. It is not important whether Dot-Six is a troll, a "warrior", a vandal, or what. In addition to attempting to alter

867:

Repeatedly inserts his responses to the this RFC in the wrong sections. There is no doubt that he understands the prinicple of confining one's remarks to the appropriate section because one of his complaints (while inserting comments in the wrong sections) was that someone else had inserted comments

2510:

I agree that arbitration should be attempted at some point soon. I realize that Nate Ladd has been arguing with .6 longer than I have. I do not intend to advocate patience indefinitely, but the longer we wait, the stronger the case against this vandalism (which is all it is so far) will become.

2322:

does a great job of explaining why it is important to research a topic before editing. I think it clear from his comments that he is a novice in philosophy. Having novices around is extremely important - their misunderstandings allow us to improve the articles. But in order to improve the article,

2314:

I'd like to see .6 do a few things. Foremost would be to register, give himself a proper user name and stop using sock puppets. Not only would thins make his own life easier, but it would also make it possible to deal with difficulties with him directly, instead of through the various article talk

1966:

it, twice. I still stand by that comment, and would add that dot-six's appears unable to respond to criticism of his behaviour as anything other than an attack on his personal character. His deletion of my comment above also includes a comment by him to respect "No Personal Attacks", and "Focus on

1904:

Dot-Six is one of two anonymous editors who are currently the subject of Requests for Comments who illustrate a special problem about disruptive anonymous editors. I agree with Knowledge policy that anonymous edits should normally be permitted. A signed-in editor who violates the 3RR rule can be

1634:

is the method of choice to resolve content disputes, "Principled Negotiation is a cooperative process whereby participants try to find a solution which meets the legitimate interests of both parties, which in the context of Knowledge usually involves APPROPRIATE MENTION OF ALL POINTS OF VIEW in an

1454:

2. What gives you the right to edit THE RESPONSE SECTION, unless you are the accused, or among those who think that the dispute is unjustified? Didn't you read the instructions, above, 'This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is

1927:

Knowledge official policy, Dot-Six has also deleted comments from this RfC. At this point, I think that it is time for arbitration. Unfortunately, in the absence of a feature to protect articles from anonymous edits, it may be necessary to enforce a ban by excluding whole ranges of addresses.

34:

dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~~~~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: 01:49, July 27, 2005 (UTC)), the page will be

1348:

I have repeatedly reverted redirects put in place by DotSix, only to have him re-revery them back. He has repeatedly shown a lack of respect for rules or the opinions of others. Whilst I have only had a limited experience in this matter, I think it is plainly obvious that DotSix is doing this

2490:

I disagree strongly. DotSix should not be given any more time. If he were willing or capable of being reasonable, he would have done so by now. He has not once responded constructively to any disagreement or objection. His repetoire of responses is limited to (1) hurling false accusations, (2)

1900:

My own opinion is that the most serious offense by Dot-Six has been editing a Knowledge official policy. I am not looking at the detailed definition of vandalism, and so do not want to state positively whether that is vandalism, but multiply editing an official policy to change its content is

2494:

He has spent the last 2 days repeating the behavior in the numbered list of complaints above. I mean literally repeating: deleting the same text from the same articles and talk pages. Obviously, he no longer cares about any of the issues, if he ever did. He's become a troll, if he weren't one

2467:

My suggestion is that we wait a day or so to see if .6 is willing to either change his dogmatic approach, seek mediation or arrange an advocate. If there is no progress, then I guess we have done as much as we can, and we can take it to arbitration. Again, I think it needs to be .6 who seeks

2425:

It isn't quite true that other users will not be inconvenienced by blocking .6's IPs. I've had this happen before, when a vandal using the same ISP as myself was blocked. But it was fixed by contacting the ISP directly, and making a complaint. presumably those who share .6's ISP could make a

2502:

Things aren't instantaneous on Knowledge. Waiting a few more days isn't going to hurt any articles in the long run. I have asked DotSix once more if he'd be willing to negotiate the dispute privately (IRC would be good) or mediate. If he refuses this, I'll turn my attention to arbitration.

2334:

Again, it is up to .6 to adopt his behaviour. Perhaps he can. If he can't, and it becomes necessary to block his IP addresses, an injustice will have been done to the other legitimate editors who apparently use the same IPs. That injustice would be down to .6, not to the Wiki admins.

2196:

DotSix says there is "no proof" that he is using these IPs. Notice he is not denying that he is behind all of these IPs, he is only claiming that there is no proof of it. In point of fact, there is ample evidence. See the comments, diffs, and links above in the list of IPs he has been

2140:

DotSix, using one of his sock puppets, improperly deleted a comment that was critical of his behavior. In the same edit he added a brief paragraph elsewhere on the page and added a sentence to the beginning of a paragraph that he had previously put on the page under a different IP.

1791:

So your testimony that RAMSEY WAS CITED as the reason for taking exception to statements made in the lead section at the time, that testimony was not in accord with the actual state of affairs? Thank you Mr. Bananas, that was the only question the defense had for you.

2476:

Well, I am attempting to talk to .6 about this in the epistemology talk area, and I would like to wait a few days as well. I'm not terribly hopeful, but I would like to exhaust the possibilities of reason (and afterward copy the argument here) before arbitration.

2426:

complaint (the email address for reporting abuse is freely available - abuse@comcast.net in the case of the block 67.182.128.0 - 67.182.159.255; see ). This might, of course, have implications for .6. But the decision to block lies with the arbitrators and admins.

2150:

I hope the breathtaking scope of DotSix's hypocrisy is clear: Not only has he himself repeatedly edited other people's comments both before and since making this complaint about Rhobite, but the very comment whose deletion he is complaining about was added by him

1390:, that it includes discussion of his behavior or his actions such as trolling (which is a patently false idea), and DotSix seems to almost always take to wiping comments of his behavior or people attempting to deal with it or resolve the situation as 1463:, which is conduct unbecoming an adminstrator? If so, please sign in in the endorsement section below, per instructions, 'Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign'. -- 172.191.129.191 16:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC) 2448:

From what I see of this guy I don't think mediation will help. Ofcourse there is no harm in trying, I just think that this is one for the ArbCom. Obviously I wont start it or anything since I am not involved in the dispute.

1338:

16:13, August 7, 2005 (UTC) Also had limited involvement, but made some of the reverts that DotSix quickly re-reverted. I think he's just a troll who's probably thrilled to have so much attention right now. Get him out of

2323:

one must be able to clearly articulate the problems one sees with it; one can do this much more easily if one is willing to learn about the topic, rather than just to assume that their naive opinion is the one that counts.

1841:

re: "For me, the worst thing about .6's behaviour and its consequences is simply the time spent by myself and others in dealing with it. This is time that could have been spent on far more productive activities." -- Banno

1322:, so don't think I was involved enough to sign the section above. Personally I think DotSix is a mere troll, but trolls can at times become too distruptive to counter by mere starvation, and action must sometimes be taken. 1477:

You mean where the evidence that you, Rhobite, were caught in conduct unbecoming an administrator (deleting the comment of another, and then not telling the truth about it when confronted with the fact) was presented, in

2330:

of .6's edits on an article have been accepted - I imagine this would be a considerable source of frustration for him; it would be for me. Getting others to accept your edits is part-and-parcel of working on the Wiki.

2094:

Banno does not report the actual state of affairs. The accused never mentioned the name, "Ramsey" at all. Repeat, the accused never mentioned Ramsey. If anyone disagrees, please post a link to the page where he did

2074:

Material directly relevant to the discussion of redundancy was removed to an archive the day after it was posted, thereby ending an attempt to reach a reasonable compromise. The discussion concerned the philosopher

1768:

1748:

2161:

It was me, Nate, not Rhobite, who moved DotSix's first response from the section where he has improperly put it and moved it to the Response section. In the same edit, I added the note explaining what I was doing.

2303:

For me, the worst thing about .6's behaviour and its consequences is simply the time spent by myself and others in dealing with it. This is time that could have been spent on far more productive activities.

2132:

DotSix has a habit of changing his own remarks (as well as those of others), so I can't promise that any of the matters I discuss here will still be mentioned in his Response by the time you read this.

1859:

Here is another good example of conduct unbecoming an adminsistrator: In the middle of this big total thermoneuclear content dispute, Rhobite arbitrarily and capriciously slaps a block on his oponent:

1866:

The allegation, "removing VfD tag" is not in accord with the actual state of affairs, the VfD tag was not removed as Rhobite alleges, it was simply moved to the discussion page where it belongs, per

2000:

on a policy? The policy isn't valid because many uses it, it is valid because it is policy) to the downright contradictory (falsly accusing a user of a personal attack while making mountains of

1349:

purely because he can. If it is possible to ban him without blocking the entire 207.200.116.* and 172.19*.*.* blocks then I believe it is in the best interests of the project to do so quickly.

651:

At one point he claimed that the NPOV policy states that all points of view should be given equal placement. When he was informed that this was not the case, he removed the paragraphs from

1674:

The proof that you, Rhobite, were caught in conduct unbecoming an administrator (deleting the comment of another, and THEN NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT IT WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE EVIDENCE

1051: 2147:

Two minutes later, Rhobite noticed the removal of the brief paragraph and restored it. He did not spot the sentence added to the beginning of a paragraph. Hence, it wasn't restored.

2079:

whose redundancy theory was the reason cited for .6's NPOV complaint; .6 did not enter into the discussion of Ramsey's work, instead archiving the discussion, prematurely ending it.

1753:

whose redundancy theory was the reason cited for .6's NPOV complaint; .6 did not enter into the discussion of Ramsey's work, instead archiving the discussion, prematurely ending it.

1092:

I attempt to discuss how DotSix's contributions violate the manual of style, and warn him about editing other users' comments. He has continued to edit comments since I warned him.

1630:

The accused never said anything like "EQUAL PLACEMENT," did he? Isn't it the actual state of affairs that the accused has consistently quoted the Knowledge Policy that Principled

938:. DotSix's edits have been reverted by Banno, Nathan Ladd, Ancheta Wis, Rhobite, JimWae, Byped, Canderson7, Essjay, Meelar, Spangineer, CryptoDerk, Asbestos, BaronLarf, Veratien. 1704:

How long will you continue to cite the wrong diff? How many times will you have to be reminded that it is not the diff you cite that we are discussing, IT IS THE ONE BEFORE IT,

2239: 1421:

This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.

1004: 110:

Also, 23:33 22 July 2005 diff shows 207.200.116.133's usage of "...you boys..." terminology in concordance with DotSix's usage, "...you boys..." appearing 15:33 16 July 2005

2165:

Please note DotSix's stuptifying hypocrisy: The you-edited-the-wrong-section complaint is about an edit that was made in order to correct HIS editing of the wrong section.

2326:

Finally, of course, adopting a civil attitude towards other editors would make .6's life easier. People are more likely to accept change when it is presented politely.

1194:

Given the rejection of a "majority rules" explicated by .6 in the talk pages, it is doubtful that the results of a survey on the issue would have a positive result.

1097:

Refusing to respond constructively to attempts by others to meet him/her halfway. For many of these the attempt to reach out to DotSix comes in the edit annotation.

2379:. I don't see the purpose of offering to mediate with someone who is trying to change the rules and change the record of the dispute. Other opinions may differ. 2311:

consequence I can see is that in amongst the hundreds of edits, Nathan noticed a genuine problem with the introduction. Perhaps this will result in an improvement.

1912:

disrupting Knowledge to make a philosophical point. I am not exactly sure what point is. There needs to be a way to minimize disruption by anonymous trolls.

2055: 1850: 1487: 1460: 2036:{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.} 1425:{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.} 1525:

You have no proof of this, it is empty allegation with no basis in fact that you can point to. I move for summary dismissal of Rhobite's nasty little

794:

Random sampling of him calling other users "vandals", "obscurantists", and erroneously accusing them of using logical fallacies: "obscurantist jihad"

1209:

page, when Banno attempted to reach a happy medium by rewriting the intro to include DotSix's points, DotSix (using the IP 172.191.126.235) reverted

2468:

mediation, since he needs to be committed to the process for it to work and he has previously accused those who object to his edits of collusion.

671:. For days he has been complaining about this perceived violation, although he himself is not above removing other users' comments intentionally. 658:

He has removed other users' comments from talk pages, claiming that they are personal attacks. At the same time, he has called other users names.

2004:

himself!). Do not be afraid about the fancy-pants latin phrases, this guy has very little understanding about the noble Art of Valid Argument.

2319: 1455:

unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete'? Shall we take it that you are now changing sides, giving up your nasty little

2190:

his contributions to the discussion is the issue. But, of course, what matters is what he did with the discussion, not who he mentioned in it.

1561:

Articles based on logical fallacy have no place in a modern encyclopedia. There is enough of that in the Bible, The Washington Times, etc. --

2441:) for 24 hours, not his main 67.182.157.6 address. I believe arbitration may be necessary but I'm willing to participate in mediation first. 2364: 589: 504: 447: 431: 402: 386: 368: 349: 272: 226: 202: 166: 148: 101: 2234:

I assume DotSix created the above project page (original version linked above) as a response to people's explainations of what is meant by

691: 573: 486: 307: 125: 82: 1597:

It IS logical fallacy to argue, "P must be true, because it is the opinion of the majority here." This is one of the main objections to

1075:

I (Rhobite) have twice suggested that DotSix contact me via e-mail or IRC so we can sort this out. These requests have gone unanswered.

703:, claiming that they are "logical fallacies". The NPOV policy is non-negotiable and may only be edited at the direction of Jimbo Wales: 557: 541: 463: 256: 184: 2261:

which includes the request for deletion header. Presumably this was intentional, but I thought it should be emphasized, nonetheless.

2533: 2376: 2356: 1516: 527: 325: 54: 1652:

Isn't this another case of the pot calling the kettle black? Rhobite has removed another user's comments from a talk page. See below.

2032:

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

1889:

This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

2289: 2235: 1552: 700: 652: 645: 1591:

re: "When informed that most users oppose his edits, he responds that this is fallacious reasoning, 'argumentum ad numerum'."

30:, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the 2206:. It is criticism of DotSix's behavior, not a personal attack. Moreover, it was appropriate since it came as part of an RfC. 1996:

I would like to say that his views on logical fallacies is, at best, superficial. The arguments he uses are often ridiculus (

1155: 1151: 1040: 27: 17: 2275: 1545:

Is there a policy prohibiting reasonable reverts which are based on sound reasons explained in the relevant discussion page?

1383:. I have been following the dispute between him and the other users, and the representations here reflect what I have seen. 1483: 1025: 996: 1860: 259:) talk page announces a battle: "You may fire when ready, Gridley." note the similarity of annotation to 207.200.116.133 1469:

re: "The following response from DotSix was moved here from where he inserted it above in the wrong section" -- Rholite

2434: 1000: 1178: 1046: 619:

This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.

1615:

re: "At one point he claimed that the NPOV policy states that all points of view should be given equal placement."

534:

Talk:Truth is appended to Archive 6 to illustrate the revert cycle now going on at the Talk page, as of Aug 13, 2005

1598: 1577:

Walk like a duck, quack like a duck, don't be surprised when people conclude that you might actually be a duck (or

1571:

re: "When he uses talk pages, he accuses other editors of using logical fallacies, of being 'obscurantists' ... "

583: 498: 441: 425: 396: 380: 362: 343: 276: 266: 220: 196: 160: 142: 95: 1863:

18:18, 2 August 2005, Rhobite blocked 67.182.157.6 (expires 18:18, 3 August 2005) (contribs) (removing VfD tag)

1867: 567: 480: 301: 119: 76: 1631: 551: 457: 250: 178: 2438: 1793: 1636: 1606: 1582: 1562: 1530: 1510: 579: 521: 437: 421: 392: 376: 358: 339: 319: 262: 216: 192: 156: 138: 91: 48: 563: 476: 297: 115: 1997: 1035: 897:

Deletes admin warning and admin explanation of block from his talk page, calling them personal attacks.

547: 246: 174: 1506: 1491: 1431:

The above summary composed by those who are a party to this nasty little personal attack is definitely

963: 517: 315: 44: 1386:

I have observed DotSix's behavior. He seems to have an extremely broad idea about what constitutes a

2417: 2409: 2380: 2348: 2018: 1982: 1928: 1913: 1290: 824: 537: 494: 2360: 2285: 1735: 1731: 1526: 1456: 1335: 72: 628:

This editor has engaged in revert wars in several articles about abstract philosophical concepts:

2247: 2213:

not have as much prominence as other views." (This distinction was explained to DotSix before at

1818: 1364: 1030: 453: 2450: 2433:

Since it's being discussed, I have blocked him once for repeatedly removing the VfD notice from

2413: 2352: 2011: 1940: 2515: 2481: 2420: 2383: 2265: 2258:

Note that the subtitle of this section (above) does not actually link to the latest version of

2252: 2021: 1985: 1977: 1931: 1916: 1494: 1407: 1345: 1315: 1293: 1278: 1252: 966: 607: 1736:

Do not make personal attacks anywhere in Knowledge. Comment on content, not on the contributor

1403: 1325: 918:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Knowledge:Requests_for_comment/DotSix&action=history

781:. Not only is this technically impossible, he violates the three revert rule in the process: 2496: 2221: 2144:

When Rhobite reverted this, quite appropriately, the two additions were, of course, removed.

1257: 1249: 731: 604: 599:

In case it is preferable for admininistration, the above information is also included in a

2259: 2076: 1946: 1803:

re: "I posted a comment on the Truth article regarding dot-six's behaviour." -- FoolWagon

1750: 1692:, is not the comment we are discussing, it's this other one that you deleted permanently: 1283: 1220: 906: 2359:

so that you understand what is being suggested. You might consider taking this issue to

2102:

The logic of this response escapes me. Yes, .6 did not mention Ramsey; indeed, this was

1529:

against someone he just does not like, which is conduct unbecoming an administrator. --

355:, comment deleted from this RfC; again the user has only done a single edit on the Wiki. 2279: 1974: 1332: 881: 713: 2274:

I have deleted that page per the VfD but felt nessacery to preserve the talk page at

2243: 2054:

signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to

1895: 1846: 1812: 1360: 1342: 1312: 1175:

DotSix immediately removed FuelWagon's comment since it was critical of his conduct.

2504: 2442: 1578: 1399: 1380: 1243: 1206: 946: 641: 949:, claiming that they exhibit "the fallacy of conflation of knowledge and belief": 1967:

content, not the editor". I have doubts that he will respond to this any better.

2512: 2478: 2262: 1275: 1269: 2069:<Banno comment moed from here to discussion page per above instructions: --> 971:

Repeatedly adding a link to a page that simply redirects to the original page.

2537: 2469: 2427: 2394: 2368: 2336: 2121: 2112: 2086: 2001: 1777: 1760: 1659: 1263: 1162: 1143: 832:

Demanding that Wiki policy be ignored when it doesn't conform to his desires.

807: 803:. By only his 8th edit anywhere on Knowledge he had already begun namecalling. 744: 735: 717: 662: 2318:

Next, I think .6 would benefit from reading more extensively before editing.

1376: 942: 811: 637: 1730:

As you can see, the ACTUAL REASON STATED for removing it was that it was a

889: 2210:

Allegation that DotSix's opponents use the Fallacy of Appeal to Popularity

1490:

is also conduct unbecoming an adminstrator, wouldn't you say, old boy? --

1329:

term "conflation," he hasn't even attempted to give coherent explanations.

1082:

Ancheta Wis attempts to explain why it is not OK for DotSix to add POV to

778: 1601:. Google argument _ad numerum_ (appeal to the popularity of a particular 2080: 1754: 1713:

re: "Removed FuelWagon's comment since it was critical of his conduct."

1375:

20:45, August 10, 2005 (UTC) I have reverted many of DotSix's edits to

293:

without the use of annotation to clearly delineate who was writing what.

2408:

Thank you for clarifying that you were addressing Dot-Six rather than

2138:

Allegation that Rhobite deleted one of DotSix comments on a talk page.

2070:

I am re-inserting this material as .6's edit removed a large portion:

1658:

re: "DotSix may claim in his response that I removed his comment from

1161:. That we are now involved in this RfC shows that the attempt failed. 576:) has been trolling Vandalism in Progress -- reverted by Teresa Knott. 544:--The AOL sockpuppet is now using DotSix's talk page as an archive. -- 1958:

Well, I consider myself an outside view. I posted a comment on the

857:

Adding a NPOV tag to a lead paragraph that he had written himself.

1959: 1319: 1169: 1083: 935: 755: 629: 467: 406: 281:

writes a direct reply to a statement which was addressed to DotSix

2169:

Did DotSix claim that all points of view must be treated equally?

1150:

to seek outside opinion on .6's behaviour. The RfC was placed in

661:

DotSix may claim in his response that I removed his comment from

466:) follows dotsix edit pattern including blanking and redirecting 328:) There are exactly three edits by this user, all to do with .6; 1602: 1432: 890:

3RR violation, again / page blanking vandalism as of Aug 6, 2005

774: 633: 471: 410: 132: 2194:

Is there evidence that the IPs above are all be used by DotSix?

2159:

Allegation that Rhobite edited the Response section of this RfC

1898:

that Dot-Six is a troll, but a troll who is being disruptive.

738:, calling it an "irrelevant diatribe with threats of reprisal" 2532:

I have commenced arbitration proceedings against DotSix - see

2153:

while he was in the process of deleting someone else's comment

993:. Note how others tried to explain to him what the problem is. 2355:

have suggested moving on to arbitration. 6., you should read

2278:

to provide evidence, if needed, for the ongoing arbitration.

1744:

re: "Archiving material as a rhetorical tool" by Mr. Banno:

1707:, where you are shown deleting a comment you never replaced? 331:

creates the stub specificaly for use in defence of .6, see

2201:

Allegation that FuelWagon made a personal attack on DotSix.

2107:

discussion by archiving it. My point was precisely that .6

1646:

re: "He has removed other users' comments from talk pages"

371:) Again this user has done only a single edit on the wiki, 1845:

If Mr. Banno and company could learn to follow Knowledge

1635:

article thus improving the quality of the article." --

1289:

Removing my signature from endorsers and adding it here.

1213:

on the claim that it was "controversial". Banno's edits:

2536:. I encourage all interested users to add a statement. 1439:

re: "The following response from DotSix ..." -- Rhobite

758:, reverts to own version repeatedly in violation of 3RR 2228: 2214: 2204: 2181: 2178: 2176: 2174: 2172: 2163: 2148: 2145: 2142: 1963: 1826: 1720: 1705: 1693: 1690: 1678: 1675: 1666: 1663: 1479: 1217: 1214: 1182: 1173: 1159: 1147: 1128: 1125: 1122: 1119: 1116: 1113: 1110: 1107: 1104: 1101: 1098: 1093: 1087: 1078: 1076: 1052:

Knowledge:Don't disrupt Knowledge to illustrate a point

991: 988: 975: 972: 960: 958: 956: 954: 952: 950: 917: 903: 898: 885: 876: 871: 869: 863: 858: 853: 850: 847: 844: 841: 836: 833: 828: 818: 815: 801: 798: 795: 790: 788: 786: 784: 782: 769: 767: 765: 763: 761: 759: 750: 748: 739: 726: 723: 721: 708: 706: 704: 695: 669: 666: 600: 533: 531: 514: 511: 508: 490: 417: 414: 372: 353: 335: 332: 329: 311: 289:

to make the reply appear as if DotSix' reply was from

284: 212: 209: 206: 188: 170: 152: 129: 109: 105: 86: 2315:

pages. It would simply be the courteous thing to do.

1849:

and "Comment on content, not on the contributor," and

2111:

discussion of Ramsey by archiving relevant material.

1662:. That is a false claim, I did remove it by accident 1060:

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute

912:

Removed portions of this RfC, stating that they were

665:. That is a false claim, I did remove it by accident 1853:, that might solve all their productivity problems. 1198:

Try to work DotSix's edits into the existing article

1005:

Knowledge:Votes for deletion/Tyranny of the majority

1719:That isn't true, is it? Here is the relevant diff: 1445:

1. What proof do you have this is from the accused?

1156:

Knowledge:Requests for comment#General user conduct

840:Repeatedly adding an NPOV tag without explanation. 1815:, "Comment on content, not on the contributor."? 934:No other users have supported DotSix's version of 542:User talk:67.182.157.6/comments past the pull date 2039:Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~): 2007:Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~): 1970:Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~): 1936:Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~): 1875:Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~~~~): 962:. As of today, he has begun doing this again. -- 1539:re: "This editor has engaged in revert wars" 1519:), calls himself "DotSix". Also editing from:" 1318:. I was only involved briefly in the events at 1197: 875:Removal of other user's comments from this RfC 2367:, in order to avoid its going to arbitration. 1962:article RFC regarding dot-six's behaviour. He 1398:rather than paying any attention to them. ---- 1158:precisely to give .6 the benefit of the doubt 916:arguments, violating 3RR, on 13 August 2005: 1679:the diff just BEFORE the one you like to cite 1555:, claiming that it is a "logical fallacy"." 979:Repeatedly tried to introduce the subject of 592:) is removing evidence on DotSix's talk page. 57:), calls himself "DotSix". Also editing from: 8: 1868:Knowledge:Categorization#Wikipedia_namespace 1811:Hasn't anyone informed you of the Knowledge 1482:? Why don't you just drop this nasty little 1152:Knowledge:Requests for comment#Miscellaneous 1233:Users certifying the basis for this dispute 862:Falsely accused others of threatening him. 1851:Knowledge:Please do not bite the newcomers 2534:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration#DotSix 2187:Did DotSix archive an ongoing discussion? 1856:re: Conduct unbecoming an adminsistrator 1003:which was deleted as the result of a VfD 905:for "tyrannous majority" in violation of 2065:Archiving material as a rhetorical tool 1776:... Yes, .6 did not mention Ramsey ... 434:) Explicitly acknowledges being DotSix. 389:) Explicitly acknowledges being DotSix. 35:deleted. The current date and time is: 2437:. I blocked one of his AOL addresses ( 2320:Knowledge:How to write a great article 2276:Knowledge talk:Tyranny of the majority 1435:, as shown in the following examples. 2365:Knowledge:AMA Requests for Assistance 1009:Knowledge:Requests for comment/DotSix 7: 1665:but I replaced it two minutes later 1302:Other users who endorse this summary 1168:FuelWagon responded to an RfC about 997:Knowledge:No tyranny of the majority 692:Knowledge talk:Neutral point of view 668:but I replaced it two minutes later 65:207.200.116.* block of IP addresses: 2128:Rebuttal to DotSix's Response above 827:'s outside response from this RFC: 285:172.193.218.186 cuts and pastes in 2377:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration 2357:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration 1872:<end of summary number one: --> 1551:re: "He also removed content from 1172:, and addressed DotSix's conduct: 1007:created by a sockpuppet of DotSix 800:, "revert to eliminate vandalism" 24: 2435:Knowledge:Tyranny of the majority 2229:Knowledge:Tyranny of the Majority 1734:, which is prohibited by policy, 1428:<begin summary number one: --> 1089:DotSix also removed this comment. 229:) Explicitly admits being DotSix. 1043:(removing other users' comments) 983:with a sentence that introduces 773:Repeatedly attempts to redirect 310:) See single edit by this user: 239:172.19*.* block of IP addresses: 2236:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 1553:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 941:Repeatedly removes sections of 725:. He has done this again today 701:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 655:which contradicted his belief. 653:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 646:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 644:. He also removed content from 2203:FuelWagon's remarks are here: 2127: 1041:Knowledge:Talk page guidelines 690:Removes several comments from 516:used to circumvent banning of 28:Knowledge:Requests for comment 18:Knowledge:Requests for comment 1: 1599:the consensus theory of truth 1480:the diff just before that one 1026:Knowledge:No personal attacks 747:"banana", a personal attack: 675:Evidence of disputed behavior 26:In order to remain listed at 2540:21:13, August 5, 2005 (UTC) 2507:01:43, August 3, 2005 (UTC) 2499:01:37, August 3, 2005 (UTC) 2472:08:18, August 2, 2005 (UTC) 2445:03:35, August 2, 2005 (UTC) 2430:23:09, August 1, 2005 (UTC) 2371:12:25, August 1, 2005 (UTC) 1894:I am inclined to agree with 754:Removes the lead section of 699:Repeatedly removes parts of 2453:06:50, August 2, 2005 (UTC) 2397:20:21, August 1, 2005 (UTC) 2339:00:08, July 31, 2005 (UTC) 2292:20:58, August 7, 2005 (UTC) 2224:06:10, July 29, 2005 (UTC) 2124:00:20, July 29, 2005 (UTC) 2056:this page's discussion page 1954:Outside view from FuelWagon 1949:16:45, August 4, 2005 (UTC) 1943:10:24, August 1, 2005 (UTC) 1408:20:37, 13 August 2005 (UTC) 1294:15:15, 13 August 2005 (UTC) 1286:16:33, August 4, 2005 (UTC) 1223:16:32, August 4, 2005 (UTC) 1179:Knowledge:Wikiquette alerts 1047:Knowledge:Three revert rule 884:as "Foolwagon" in this RFC 37:12:36, 2 October 2024 (UTC) 2554: 2516:03:45, 3 August 2005 (UTC) 2482:00:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC) 2421:21:53, 1 August 2005 (UTC) 2384:12:28, 1 August 2005 (UTC) 2115:11:56, July 28, 2005 (UTC) 2089:20:49, July 27, 2005 (UTC) 2014:08:14, July 29, 2005 (UTC) 1910:an anonymous troll who is 1816: 1780:11:56, July 28, 2005 (UTC) 1763:20:49, July 27, 2005 (UTC) 1689:The comment you replaced, 1581:, as the case may be). -- 1346:02:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC) 1266:06:39, July 27, 2005 (UTC) 1260:04:01, July 27, 2005 (UTC) 1246:01:49, July 27, 2005 (UTC) 1165:12:15, July 28, 2005 (UTC) 1136:Discuss with a third party 1064:(provide diffs and links) 967:00:30, 2 August 2005 (UTC) 902:Created a bogus 3RR alert 868:in the wrong section!!!!! 797:, "argumentum ad numerum" 679:(provide diffs and links) 2266:19:58, 29 July 2005 (UTC) 2253:19:17, 29 July 2005 (UTC) 2216:, but he has ignored it.) 2022:06:48, 30 July 2005 (UTC) 1986:06:48, 30 July 2005 (UTC) 1978:22:23, 28 July 2005 (UTC) 1932:23:42, 31 July 2005 (UTC) 1917:22:00, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 1495:18:56, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 1316:19:35, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 1279:17:51, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 1272:08:32, 2005 July 27 (UTC) 1253:02:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 608:11:33, 27 July 2005 (UTC) 413:with same edit summaries 287:another user's statements 277:User talk:172.193.218.186 135:to redirect to Wiktionary 1908:I think that Dot-Six is 1884:Outside view by McClenon 1677:) is clearly evident in 1527:personal attack/vendetta 1484:personal attack/vendetta 1457:personal attack/vendetta 614:Statement of the dispute 1992:Outside view from Gkhan 1396:tyranny of the majority 1068:Talk to the other party 1001:Tyranny of the majority 806:Removal of comments by 894:ditto Aug 11th - 12th. 416:, removal of VfD tags 2528:arbitration commenced 1998:Argumentum ad numerum 1124:, and all edits from 1036:Knowledge:Sock puppet 283:11:24, 27 July 2005. 2439:User:172.196.123.246 1922:Time for Arbitration 999:is a re-creation of 825:User:Robert McClenon 538:Talk:Truth/Archive 6 405:) Futher reverts on 279:22:44, 28 July 2005 2361:Knowledge:Mediation 1901:clearly abusive. 1861:Special:lpblocklist 1486:of yours, Rhobite? 1216:. DotSix's revert: 1018:Applicable policies 88:Large paste from .6 1488:Biting the newbies 1392:ad hominem attacks 1237:(sign with ~~~~) 1031:Knowledge:Civility 1367: 1306:(sign with ~~~~) 987:. See edits from 603:, for reference. 2545: 2282: 2250: 2242:for deletion. — 1829: 1639:(emphasis added) 1374: 1371: 1359: 1357: 1354: 1190:Conduct a survey 928:(for reference) 734:'s comment from 732:User:Ancheta Wis 716:'s comment from 38: 2553: 2552: 2548: 2547: 2546: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2530: 2418:Robert McClenon 2410:Robert McClenon 2381:Robert McClenon 2349:Robert McClenon 2345: 2301: 2280: 2248: 2232: 2171:Yes, he did at 2130: 2067: 2049: 2029: 2019:Robert McClenon 1994: 1983:Robert McClenon 1956: 1929:Robert McClenon 1924: 1914:Robert McClenon 1911: 1899: 1886: 1833: 1832: 1825: 1821: 1794:172.193.218.186 1732:personal attack 1637:172.191.129.191 1607:172.191.129.191 1583:172.191.129.191 1563:172.191.129.191 1531:172.191.129.191 1418: 1388:personal attack 1372: 1369: 1355: 1352: 1304: 1291:Robert McClenon 1235: 1200: 1192: 1181:notice 23 July 1138: 1062: 1020: 779:wiktionary:true 683:Behavior issues 677: 626: 616: 580:172.191.183.242 495:172.198.122.213 438:172.196.121.225 422:172.193.218.186 393:172.193.184.192 377:172.193.154.102 359:172.191.129.191 340:172.197.102.120 263:172.193.218.186 217:207.200.116.133 193:207.200.116.198 157:207.200.116.196 139:207.200.116.130 92:207.200.116.133 36: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2551: 2549: 2529: 2526: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2520: 2519: 2518: 2492: 2485: 2484: 2465: 2464: 2463: 2462: 2461: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2387: 2386: 2344: 2341: 2300: 2297: 2296: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2269: 2268: 2231: 2226: 2218: 2217: 2207: 2198: 2191: 2184: 2166: 2156: 2129: 2126: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2116: 2097: 2096: 2091: 2090: 2083: 2082: 2066: 2063: 2061: 2048: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2028: 2025: 2016: 2015: 1993: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1980: 1955: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1944: 1923: 1920: 1909: 1893: 1885: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1834: 1831: 1830: 1822: 1817: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1797: 1796: 1784: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1771: 1770: 1765: 1764: 1757: 1756: 1742: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1696: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1645: 1643: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1614: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1590: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1570: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1538: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1504: 1502: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1438: 1417: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1384: 1350: 1340: 1330: 1323: 1303: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1296: 1287: 1281: 1273: 1267: 1261: 1255: 1247: 1234: 1231: 1229: 1227: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1199: 1196: 1191: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1176: 1166: 1137: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1095: 1090: 1080: 1061: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1049: 1044: 1038: 1033: 1028: 1019: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 994: 977: 969: 939: 926:Content issues 923: 922: 921: 920: 910: 900: 895: 892: 887: 882:User:FuelWagon 878: 873: 865: 860: 855: 838: 830: 821: 804: 792: 771: 752: 741: 728: 714:User:FuelWagon 710: 697: 676: 673: 625: 622: 615: 612: 611: 597: 596: 595: 594: 593: 577: 564:172.194.218.75 561: 545: 492: 477:172.214.10.196 474: 451: 435: 419: 390: 374: 356: 337: 313: 298:172.191.98.226 295: 260: 241: 240: 235: 233: 232: 231: 230: 214: 190: 172: 154: 136: 116:207.200.116.14 113: 89: 73:207.200.116.67 67: 66: 61: 59: 58: 41: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2550: 2541: 2539: 2535: 2527: 2517: 2514: 2509: 2508: 2506: 2501: 2500: 2498: 2493: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2483: 2480: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2471: 2452: 2447: 2446: 2444: 2440: 2436: 2432: 2431: 2429: 2424: 2423: 2422: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2403: 2402: 2396: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2385: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2373: 2372: 2370: 2366: 2362: 2358: 2354: 2350: 2342: 2340: 2338: 2332: 2329: 2324: 2321: 2316: 2312: 2310: 2305: 2298: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2277: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2270: 2267: 2264: 2260: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2254: 2251: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2230: 2227: 2225: 2223: 2215: 2211: 2208: 2205: 2202: 2199: 2195: 2192: 2188: 2185: 2182: 2179: 2177: 2175: 2173: 2170: 2167: 2164: 2160: 2157: 2154: 2149: 2146: 2143: 2139: 2136: 2135: 2134: 2125: 2123: 2114: 2110: 2105: 2101: 2100: 2099: 2098: 2093: 2092: 2088: 2085: 2084: 2081: 2078: 2073: 2072: 2071: 2064: 2062: 2059: 2057: 2053: 2046: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2037: 2034: 2033: 2026: 2024: 2023: 2020: 2013: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2005: 2003: 1999: 1991: 1987: 1984: 1981: 1979: 1976: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1968: 1965: 1961: 1953: 1948: 1945: 1942: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1934: 1933: 1930: 1921: 1919: 1918: 1915: 1906: 1902: 1897: 1891: 1890: 1883: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1873: 1870: 1869: 1864: 1862: 1857: 1854: 1852: 1848: 1843: 1828: 1824: 1823: 1820: 1814: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1795: 1790: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1779: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1767: 1766: 1762: 1759: 1758: 1755: 1752: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1737: 1733: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1721: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1706: 1703: 1702: 1701: 1700: 1694: 1691: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1680: 1676: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1667: 1664: 1661: 1651: 1650: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1638: 1633: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1608: 1604: 1603:point of view 1600: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1584: 1580: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1564: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1554: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1518: 1515: 1512: 1508: 1496: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1476: 1475: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1462: 1458: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1440: 1436: 1434: 1429: 1426: 1423: 1422: 1415: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1382: 1378: 1366: 1362: 1351: 1347: 1344: 1341: 1337: 1334: 1331: 1327: 1324: 1321: 1317: 1314: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1301: 1295: 1292: 1288: 1285: 1282: 1280: 1277: 1274: 1271: 1268: 1265: 1262: 1259: 1256: 1254: 1251: 1248: 1245: 1242: 1241: 1240: 1239: 1238: 1232: 1230: 1222: 1218: 1215: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1201: 1195: 1189: 1183: 1180: 1177: 1174: 1171: 1167: 1164: 1160: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1142: 1141: 1140: 1139: 1135: 1129: 1126: 1123: 1120: 1117: 1114: 1111: 1108: 1105: 1102: 1099: 1096: 1094: 1091: 1088: 1085: 1081: 1079: 1077: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1065: 1059: 1053: 1050: 1048: 1045: 1042: 1039: 1037: 1034: 1032: 1029: 1027: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1017: 1010: 1006: 1002: 998: 995: 992: 989: 986: 982: 978: 976: 973: 970: 968: 965: 961: 959: 957: 955: 953: 951: 948: 944: 940: 937: 933: 932: 931: 930: 929: 927: 919: 915: 911: 908: 904: 901: 899: 896: 893: 891: 888: 886: 883: 880:Referring to 879: 877: 874: 872: 870: 866: 864: 861: 859: 856: 854: 851: 848: 845: 842: 839: 837: 834: 831: 829: 826: 822: 819: 816: 813: 809: 805: 802: 799: 796: 793: 791: 789: 787: 785: 783: 780: 776: 772: 770: 768: 766: 764: 762: 760: 757: 753: 751: 749: 746: 742: 740: 737: 733: 729: 727: 724: 722: 719: 715: 711: 709: 707: 705: 702: 698: 696: 693: 689: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 680: 674: 672: 670: 667: 664: 659: 656: 654: 649: 647: 643: 639: 635: 631: 623: 621: 620: 613: 610: 609: 606: 602: 591: 588: 585: 581: 578: 575: 572: 569: 565: 562: 559: 556: 553: 549: 548:172.197.67.67 546: 543: 539: 535: 532: 529: 526: 523: 519: 515: 512: 509: 506: 503: 500: 496: 493: 491: 488: 485: 482: 478: 475: 473: 469: 465: 462: 459: 455: 454:172.192.86.66 452: 449: 446: 443: 439: 436: 433: 430: 427: 423: 420: 418: 415: 412: 408: 404: 401: 398: 394: 391: 388: 385: 382: 378: 375: 373: 370: 367: 364: 360: 357: 354: 351: 348: 345: 341: 338: 336: 333: 330: 327: 324: 321: 317: 314: 312: 309: 306: 303: 299: 296: 294: 292: 288: 282: 278: 274: 271: 268: 264: 261: 258: 255: 252: 248: 247:172.195.53.33 245: 244: 243: 242: 238: 237: 236: 228: 225: 222: 218: 215: 213: 210: 207: 204: 201: 198: 194: 191: 189: 186: 183: 180: 176: 175:207.200.116.7 173: 171: 168: 165: 162: 158: 155: 153: 150: 147: 144: 140: 137: 134: 130: 127: 124: 121: 117: 114: 111: 107: 106:See this diff 103: 100: 97: 93: 90: 87: 84: 81: 78: 74: 71: 70: 69: 68: 64: 63: 62: 56: 53: 50: 46: 43: 42: 40: 33: 29: 19: 2531: 2466: 2346: 2333: 2327: 2325: 2317: 2313: 2308: 2306: 2302: 2233: 2219: 2209: 2200: 2193: 2186: 2168: 2158: 2152: 2137: 2131: 2120: 2108: 2103: 2077:Frank Ramsey 2068: 2060: 2051: 2050: 2038: 2035: 2031: 2030: 2027:Outside view 2017: 2006: 1995: 1969: 1957: 1935: 1925: 1907: 1903: 1892: 1888: 1887: 1874: 1871: 1865: 1858: 1855: 1844: 1840: 1802: 1751:Frank Ramsey 1743: 1712: 1657: 1644: 1613: 1589: 1579:obscurantist 1569: 1550: 1537: 1513: 1507:67.182.157.6 1503: 1492:172.192.66.3 1468: 1437: 1430: 1427: 1424: 1420: 1419: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1381:Epistemology 1326:Christofurio 1305: 1236: 1228: 1210: 1207:Epistemology 1193: 1067: 1066: 1063: 1008: 984: 980: 964:63.231.15.66 947:Epistemology 925: 924: 913: 682: 681: 678: 660: 657: 650: 642:Epistemology 627: 618: 617: 598: 586: 570: 554: 524: 518:67.182.157.6 501: 483: 460: 444: 428: 399: 383: 365: 346: 322: 316:172.192.66.3 304: 291:another user 290: 286: 280: 269: 253: 234: 223: 199: 181: 163: 145: 122: 98: 79: 60: 51: 45:67.182.157.6 31: 25: 2375:I did read 2343:Arbitration 2299:Restitution 1632:Negotiation 1250:Ancheta Wis 1154:instead of 624:Description 605:Ancheta Wis 2047:Discussion 2002:Ad hominem 1947:Ravenswood 1660:Talk:Truth 1284:Ravenswood 1221:Ravenswood 1146:set up an 985:philosophy 914:ad hominem 808:User:Banno 745:User:Banno 736:Talk:Truth 718:Talk:Truth 663:Talk:Truth 131:Revert of 2497:Nate Ladd 2307:The only 2281:Sasquatch 2240:nominated 2222:Nate Ladd 1975:FuelWagon 1621:Citation? 1377:Knowledge 1258:Nate Ladd 943:Knowledge 812:Talk:true 638:Knowledge 601:diff here 2309:positive 2244:Asbestos 1896:Asbestos 1819:Shortcut 1517:contribs 1459:on this 1416:Response 1361:Kzollman 1343:Veratien 1313:Asbestos 1127:through 990:through 907:WP:POINT 823:Removes 730:Removes 712:Removes 590:contribs 574:contribs 558:contribs 528:contribs 505:contribs 487:contribs 464:contribs 448:contribs 432:contribs 403:contribs 387:contribs 369:contribs 350:contribs 326:contribs 308:contribs 273:contribs 257:contribs 227:contribs 203:contribs 185:contribs 167:contribs 149:contribs 126:contribs 102:contribs 83:contribs 55:contribs 2505:Rhobite 2443:Rhobite 2109:avoided 2104:despite 1964:deleted 1400:Mysidia 1244:Rhobite 1205:On the 334:, also 108:... ... 2513:WhiteC 2479:WhiteC 2263:WhiteC 2197:using. 1847:policy 1827:WP:NPA 1813:policy 1605:). -- 1505:re: "* 1461:newbie 1433:biased 1276:WhiteC 1270:JimWae 743:Calls 352:) see 128:) See 85:) See 2538:Banno 2470:Banno 2451:gkhan 2428:Banno 2414:gkhan 2395:Banno 2369:Banno 2353:gkhan 2347:Both 2337:Banno 2180:and 2122:Banno 2113:Banno 2095:here: 2087:Banno 2012:gkhan 1960:Truth 1941:gkhan 1778:Banno 1769:here: 1761:Banno 1339:here. 1333:Baron 1320:Truth 1264:Banno 1170:Truth 1163:Banno 1144:Banno 1084:Truth 981:Truth 936:Truth 810:from 756:Truth 630:Truth 536:(see 468:Truth 407:Truth 205:) See 187:) See 169:) See 151:) See 16:< 2351:and 2328:None 2249:Talk 1879:~~~~ 1511:talk 1404:talk 1379:and 1365:Talk 1336:Larf 1211:that 1148:RfC 945:and 775:True 634:True 584:talk 568:talk 552:talk 522:talk 499:talk 481:talk 472:True 458:talk 442:talk 426:talk 411:True 409:and 397:talk 381:talk 363:talk 344:talk 320:talk 302:talk 267:talk 251:talk 221:talk 197:talk 179:talk 161:talk 143:talk 133:True 120:talk 96:talk 77:talk 49:talk 32:same 2412:or 2363:or 2052:All 1668:." 1394:or 1219:-- 777:to 470:to 2246:| 2220:-- 2058:. 1792:-- 1406:) 1363:| 1121:, 1118:, 1109:, 1086:: 1011:}} 817:, 814:, 720:: 694:: 640:, 636:, 632:, 540:) 530:) 513:, 510:, 507:) 489:) 275:) 211:, 208:, 39:. 2290:看 2288:↔ 2286:讲 2284:↔ 1738:? 1695:. 1514:· 1509:( 1402:( 1373:· 1370:· 1368:· 1358:· 1356:· 1353:· 1115:, 1112:, 1106:, 1103:, 1100:, 974:, 909:. 852:, 849:, 846:, 843:, 835:, 820:, 587:· 582:( 571:· 566:( 560:) 555:· 550:( 525:· 520:( 502:· 497:( 484:· 479:( 461:· 456:( 450:) 445:· 440:( 429:· 424:( 400:· 395:( 384:· 379:( 366:· 361:( 347:· 342:( 323:· 318:( 305:· 300:( 270:· 265:( 254:· 249:( 224:· 219:( 200:· 195:( 182:· 177:( 164:· 159:( 146:· 141:( 123:· 118:( 112:| 99:· 94:( 80:· 75:( 52:· 47:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

:Requests for comment/DotSix - Knowledge

Index