Thread:Ryoung122/@comment-1272640-20170906223854/@comment-26916705-20170907161538

I condemn your speech, Pluto2.

The Gerontology Wiki is a place to honor the longevity of world's oldest people. As we can read on the front page, it's an encyclopedia about gerontology, the study of human aging and longevity, with a focus for aspects related to supercentenarians, longevity and oldest people. The goal is to create a comprehensive encyclopedia on gerontology. Everyone can join the wiki and help expand it. It means that it is not compulsory for you to participate in editing the Gerontology Wiki, however, if you want to join it then we expect you to fufill a few guidelines.

First and foremost, you are expected to respect the admins who have been here since the Gerontology Wiki's creation in 2007. How dare you suggest the Gerontology Wiki was "ruined" upon the fact that since 2015 it has been in a stable evolutionary process, the rules and guidelines have been regulated, both the number and the quality of articles has rapidly improved. Looking into right upper corner, we are about to reach the milestone of 2000 articles(!) on the Gerontology Wiki. As Ryoung122 pointed out, the Gerontology Wiki has improved to the point that it has become a source in news reports. Clearly, it's not due to the content alone, but also due to its organization and administration. By suggesting the Gerontology Wiki is in "ruin", you disrespect the work of numerous valuable and respectful contributors to the Gerontology Wiki. Why are you trying to mock the Gerontology Wiki by saying it's hosted on a website called "fandom"? It's not the engine that decides over the reliability of the Gerontology Wiki, but it's content, standards, organization, administration and positive energy of its contributors. A positive energy which you lack completely.

You should really not challenge one of the chief admins, Ryoung122, whose authority in the field of gerontology, also outside the Gerontology Wiki, is beyond question. The arguments you've used are below level of a responsible person. You resort to such moves as ad personam mockery, calling names, false conspiracy theories, attempts to seed discord among admins and stalking other people on Facebook. I think that the real issue here is that you were willing to seize power, you desired to force your own rules here, you wanted to control everything, whereas you have neither the authority, nor sensitivity, let alone a positive spirit. You were even banned on the 110 club for wishing death to a supercentenarian. Not acceptable...

On Gerontology Wiki, you are currently a blocked editor with a history of troublemaking (including getting blocked on other Wikias and fan forums.

Now that you failed to force your "rules" here, you throw mud and spit venom on the Gerontology Wiki as a whole. I'd agree with you on just one thing. Namely, that respect has to be earned. After reading your speech here, it is clear to me that I should not give you my respect. The level of aggresion and hatred you expose here makes me believe I should not take your accusations seriously.

You should switch your computer off and go out for a walk. If after it you still can't calm down, then I advise you to move on to a different interest.

I wish you a peaceful day.

White Eaglet (talk) 16:15, September 7, 2017 (UTC)

Sysop, Gerontology Wiki