Thread:SingaporeBro95/@comment-14250-20200119100348

I felt sad seeing that at Thread:1760814. I am a somewhat portly person and have been bullied in the past with words like that. Even when it is directed at others and not me, it is still upsetting to see.

I know you say you regret nothing, but surely it would be desirable to have your earliest grievances acknowledged/verified, and surely you realize that calling other users (even if you also use it to refer to self) stuff like 'asshole' or making a series of sock accounts isn't likely to lead to such a resolution.

Most are not going to be able to look past the vitriol at the actual history you are referring to. You make reference to past events, and did interestingly link to some examples, but it's how you summarize them which makes it fall on mostly deaf ears.

For example merely summarizing admin behavior as 'assholes' gets nowhere. Even using a more mainstream term like 'abuse' is not specific enough.

TBH while I think Lion King is a great movie (and Guard a great spinoff) my interest hasn't led to more than an occasional interest in poking at the wiki, so I haven't been witness to the years of history the admin team has had, so it's hard to get an exact feel for it.

Something like "insane with power" does seem like an extreme thing to say about another user, for example, and GH4E has seemed like a reasonable person in the interactions I've had, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm aware of whatever it was that spurred on the action.

Perhaps explanations for this type of thing seem obvious to some admins since it's fresh in their memories, but less obvious to others who haven't observed all the same edits. For that reason, I think it would be good to do forum or blog or talk page / message wall addendums to such edit summaries to explain their meaning in more detail, and give more specifics for people to respond to if they have some disagreements about it. 