User talk:2600:1700:8680:E900:8D38:412:2186:51A4

Special:Contributions/2600:1700:8680:E900:0:0:0:0/64
The block coincided with the following attempted post:

If you want to categorize death] itself as medical then remove sources according to [[WP:MEDRS, I fear I must oppose that as well, because "without death, life has no meaning" and civilization would lose itself if every POV implying so silenced. : As for your comment about consensus on you 2R, consensus implies a finished discussion where no opposes the action to take anymore. Consensus can't occur without a discussion, nor with even one single individual willing to disagree and discuss further; unless you feel willing to exclude them from that discussion but I don't want to believe wikipedia operates that way.  : Anyways no one has responded to a single word I wrote in my original post in this section.  :~

So, no, I didn't express IDHT behavior, but others did.

No, that doesn't qualify as WP:NOTTHEM, because, while I can prove others disruptively added that banner without discussion, I didn't get blocked for that. I got blocked to censor moral WP:OUTRAGE.

I want to emphasize: I did not reverted anyone after they decided to participate in the discussion in the relevant section.

Discovered this contribution page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2600:1700:8680:E900:0:0:0:0/64 collects all posts by this IP range, so I found the original administrator to respond to the unblock request.

Also, even treating the 3:2 non-consensus as consensus, calling suicide medical does not mean we exclude non-medical sources. Only one editor in the whole rfc mentioned the thought non-"medical" qualify as unsuitable for suicide, calling me incompetent because of that then failing to respond after that or give any reason for their opinion.

Excluding sources requires discussion. A discussion not had, because I have gotten censored without just cause by: User:Berean_Hunter plus User:Red_Rock_Canyon.

2600:1700:8680:E900:8D38:412:2186:51A4 (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  07:29, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Short version: you have already used your account to argue and then tried to slip over to using IPs that change to continue it. That is called IP socking and we're not having it, period, non-negotiable. Your reasons for doing this were wrong and are not accepted. If I see you continue pushing the subject with either IPs or your account again, I will indef your account as Not Here and block your IPs for much longer than this round. Shifting to IPs was a stupid idea. Keeping the argument going is worse. Your ship has sailed when it comes to this subject and you need to drop it entirely. Not another word.