Thread:Dirtbag Daryl/@comment-26127492-20171119180257/@comment-26127492-20171119184206

Dirtbag Daryl wrote: Darkknight2149 wrote: Dirtbag Daryl wrote: lol, I warned you multiple times to stop edit warring. if you had any kind of intention to dispute it rationally then you would've left a message on my wall for a discussion.

since you're clearly angry over what happened (your fault btw), I'll leave you to your own devices. you have 3 days to calm down, after all. really though, be an adult and come to terms with the fact that the way you handled the situation was wrong and get over it. it's 3 days.

When someone presents direct and indisputable proof of something, and your only argument against it is (and I quote) "LOL, that's proof of nothing", the onus is on you to discuss the matter, or provide a valid explanation for the revert with proof of your own. Instead, you persisted in giving childish responses before banning me with zero warning (except after the ban was made).

Note that if you do not provide a more reasonable explanation of your behaviour, or simply unban me so that we may discuss the dispute officially on your wall, I will report you in less than three days. It's not about the content dispute, it's about how you behaved. I presented more than that in my argument for the content in the page and you know it. dishonesty would help your narrative if proof of the conversation didn't exist, so:

"LOL that's proof of nothing. the name is a direct reference to the kill and the fatality isn't even the same. at best, you could say it's similar as a separate trivia piece. you revert again, though, and it's edit warring."

this is a pretty straight-forward and simple statement, is it not? the name of the fatality is a reference to the kill. is it the same? no, but neither is Hotaru's. similar, sure, but not the same. I gave you simple instructions to not edit-war and add it as a separate trivia piece, but you decided to have a baby fit. it's quite funny, really.

anywho, because the proof was invalid and your edits trying to add the content back in were edit warring, I told you quit doing so multiple times. I'm sure you know what edit warring is, and what you did was an undeniable example of it, so that's on you. no matter how you wanna try to stretch it, you were at fault for being stubborn and not trying to settle it rationally.

as for my behavior you're so unfond of, I couldn't really care less. I didn't insult you, I gave you alternatives, and I gave you three fair warnings. my wording getting under your skin isn't really my concern. you say you're not angry but it's pretty hard to believe considering how tilted you are over a 3-sentence edit summary haha

EDIT: also why would I unban you after you explicitly broke rules after being repeatedly warned? we're talking about the issue just fine here lol

You broke the same rules, only without actual proof. The side-by-side comparison is nearly identical (though I don't think you even watched it), and if you just admitted that they are not the same, why would you re-add the inaccurate information into the article? You also forget that you made no attempt to discuss the issue either, other than denying blatant proof that they are not the same thing. You made straightfoward statements in your edit warring, but presented no evidence. You also reverted first so, administrator or not, it would be your responsibility to discuss the matter.

"I didn't insult you."

That's exactly what you did and continue to do. There's more to insults than name calling. You don't see how laughing at other users you disagree with is uncivil? If you don't, then you probably shouldn't be an administrator.