User:Bornestera~enwiki

This is a protest from a blocked user from the dutch Wikipedia Title of the picture is "Jezus oversees the millions who have been killed in his name"

Situation
This user has decided not to contribute to the Wikipedia-project anymore. There are users who only want to see a single side of a subject. In historical subjects this causes tension. To push this single view there is an unshamed removal of sources and references. My favourite subjects covers the pre-christian society of Frisia / Netherlands. Some want us believe that there was no culture, no prosperity and especially NO LAW. Some only accept the historical view where happiness started with the arrival of christianity. Heretics cannot be happy

Legends tell us another story, though legends grow and change during centuries. Beowulf contains mostly heretic parts, though just a bit polluted with a christian preacher. There is a legend of the Asega’s, men who memorized the (common) laws. There are 2 versions of how the Asega’s got knowledge of these laws, in one legend it is the god Forsite. In the other it is suggested, not stated, that it could be jezus. So Forsite got removed from the legend, and the presence of jezus is placed as a fact. Heretics don’t have gods.

Laws and rules have survived the centuries, because some were written down about a millennium ago. A historian motivated his conclusions that these laws date from the first part of the 7th century. This is not accepted by the single-view-pushers. This dating makes clear that there was a prospering society with rules, and no christian god. So this is removed, without proper motivation. Heretics don’t have laws.

One of the first preacher to enter this society, Boniface, was according to history brutally killed during a robbery, and made into a martyr and declared holy. This has been written in the so-called Vitea. We all know that Vitea are mostly lies. There are at least 3 different versions about his death. Research was done, and a historian concluded that Boniface was a rude pusher of his religion. He stated clearly “The old Frisians had the full right to kill Boniface….” This historian is Hans Mol, a professor and the highest authority in this field. Again edit-wars exploded, the prof did not know what he’s talking about, or was talking crap. Others wanted to redo his research to get a different result. And the defender of the professor was blocked. The article states now: “…Some suggest that the old Frisians had a right to kill….” Heretics don’t have rights.

After baptism a legend was formed that 700 Frisians onder command of Magnus Forteman joined Charlemagne to retake Rome for the Pope Leo III. Because they were regarded as barbarians, they were send in front so they could die first. No-one would shed a tear for them. The unexpected happened, the Frisians liberated the Saint Peter. And the Pope could return. In reward for this action they got their “Schola”, the church of the Frisians, on the closest hill to the Saint Peter. And the privilege that Frisians would be free forever. Historians who write about this are regarded as “unreliable” and removed from Wikipedia. That church is a coincident. Barbarians did not conquer Rome.

The privilege of freedom for the Frisians is also a difficult subject to place on Wikipedia. Reading the article nobody will believe that the privilege would even be a tiny bit true. While it has been reconfirmed by a Pope, and by 2 Emperors. A copy from 1300 has miraculous survived the centuries. From Magnus Forteman up to 15th century there was no “god-appointed” ruler in Frisia, no King or Emperor ruled this part of the world. Their leader was chosen and called a Duke or Dux. This caused autrage and stress on some. Frisians DID NOT reinvent democracy. Archeological finds sometimes support legends. A certain group ignores these hard facts. A Fibulae has been found, more beautiful than the one from Sutton Hoo. That artefact was not stolen, or was not imported as some want us to believe, it was made in Frisia. A lot of gold from that period has been found, and some “Dukes” are only know to us by a single coin. Historians write about this, but these publications are ignored on Wikipedia, or misquoted.

Escalation
Faced with evidence, those users start complaining that I am misquoting and abuse of references. That is a god-damned-lie. There is no real hard evidence that I “misquoted” any source. On the contrary do I have evidence of misquotes, reference abuse, bad translation and lies.

Because I use sources and quotes I am considered an enemy of a specific group active at Wikipedia. Only the allegations were enough to mark me as a Vandal, and a poll started to remove me from Wikipedia. And there are enough users who wanted to support it. The poll was successful in branding me as a vandal, and to block me infinite.

This lynching mob has been corrected by the arbcom. That is the single good point sofar. On Monday, June 02, 2008 I mailed my protest, and on Sat, 7 Jun 2008 the Arbcom confirmed that the protest was received. It is interesting to observe that the Arbcom choose to accept a case, which was unknown to me, and covering only a part of the subject. This case was started 21 jule 2008, without notifing the person involved. It is remarkable that the Arbcom prevers to accept an easy case, filed 7 weeks after my difficult case.

I do not have an answer on my question to the Arbom, no justice has been done.

The result of the easy and party case is a block for 6 months. Not enough for the lynching mob, they want an infinite block. Now already some are planning to get me blocked again after those 6 months……………………

Confession
If evidence is clear enough, and the opponent is deliberate equivocate, or just doesn’t want to read the sources and references, they will meet hard talk from my side. I will start barking the truth, and the other wil sing a lie. This caused several blocks, because barking unlike lying is not allowed.

In this hard talk, I got some interesting reactions: a moderator who has no own opinion, only follows the majority.

Two moderators who really don’t understand the human rights, and don’t even have the capability to separate an insult or threat to an opinion. They consider making demands on a plane, in possession of a bomb, is a matter of free speech. In totally 8 point these moderators make very clear they obviously didn’t finish highschool.

There was somebody proud on the fact that I could not understand him, later he confessed that he was mentally retarded, when I confirmed that he filed a complaint to block me (?)

Rude pushers of religion will meet hard talk: god is the result of imagination of man, man is not the result of imagination of god.

The picture on my userpage in the Dutch Wiki has coused a editwar, I had to replace it and to defend it while it was very clear it complied to alle the rules for uploading. Just look at the picture and you will understand. (I cannot upload it to the English Wiki, because it is not jet 100 years old).

I confess that I stepped on some (long) toes, and made some enemies for life. This I don’t care because I have the proof that lies are accepted and friend cover up.

Therefore:

My demands
Before I make one contribution to Wikipedia, an important demand must be met:

'''Anybody who removes a valid source, or misquotes, should be blocked. '''

So calling an authority ignorant in his own field should be blocked. Anybody who want to push a single view should be blocked, misquotes to push a single view should be blocked, anybody who wants to do a research all over to get a different result should be blocked, etc.

And somebody who placed lies on Wikipedia, should be called a lier.

Bornestera (talk) 06:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Shortcuts
For the dutch readers: My unanswered request to the arbcom The gathering of the lynching mob The accusations, without proof, read carefully And the remark "leno" (latin for pimp) has been redrawn shortly after, but though used.... The easy way out for the arbcom, blocking for 6 months

And the result is:
The answer of the arbcom, brought by Venullian, after 3 months, is that they will not accept the case. The goal of the Wiki-project is to make all knowledge reachable for everybody. My request to the arbcom was NOT for me as a single person, it covered a principle, I want users blocked who remove sources and references to affrim their (religious) point of view in historical subjects..... The unanswering of my request to react on ruthless pushing of a single view gives a very clear answer that pushers of a single view are supported.

In the search for motivation, the Arbcom uses the fact that I evaded the block and used sock puppets. At first: I never used sock puppets, it was allways very clear who was talking, and I evaded a block many times before, just to point out that the block was unrightfully, rude and protecting liars. At second: sometimes I forgot to log on and made additions - and this is called vandalism ? Again it was very clear who made the additions. What a pathetic search for motivations.

If a person lies, I am allowed to use the word "Liar". If a person thinks a professor talks nonsense, I am allowed to use the word "Dumb". If a person pushes a religious point of view, I am allowed to use the word "fundamentalist". If a person pushes his single side view by the removal of unwanted but valid sources, I am allowed to use the word "Propaganda". And if a person manipulates sources continously, I can make a comparison with Goebbels.......

The next step of this mob is the removal of my user page, which was very hard to reach this morning. I had sort of to re-activate my page. To parry this I will make home copies of these pages. The pages with the luynching mob is a very good example why Wikipedia won't work. Only based on accusations, without digging deeper, friends and like-minded persons vote for an infite block.....

Bornestera (talk) 06:24, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

nl:Gebruiker:Bornestera