User talk:Crud3w4re/Archive 1

Warning
RE: User:Ruy Lopez, User talk:Piotrus It seems to me that you are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars. Travb (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL
Re: your e-mail.

Please do not target one or more user's pages or talk pages for abuse or insults, unwarranted doctoring or blanking. It can be seen as vandalism and may get you blocked from editing Wikipedia.

Lets make something crystal clear: Your political ideologies are too be kept to yourself,  they are not to be expressed by vandalizing others talk pages. There is no exception to this rule: I don't care whose page it is and what views they have. This is not the place to argue your political ideology: go to frontpagemag.org or some other blog to do this.

I do not agree with User:Ruy Lopez on a lot of issues, but no one should have their web page vandalized, no matter how unpopular their views are.

Your email has been marked as spam, and will go right to the trash instead of to my inbox, so if you want to talk to me, please do it on my talk page, were there is a clear record of everything you say. Travb (talk) 20:53, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Banned?
Why was I banned? I didn't even receive a warning! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crud3w4re (talk • contribs)

Appeal
How do I write a written apology? I wasn't aware of the rules of Wiki, I was very angry for the pro-communist biasness I came across, so I lost my cool, but I am very sorry. I'm a new member.Crud3w4re 04:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I sent the admin an email of the following apology:

"Hello.

Please enter my talk page.

I am sorry for the words from me to you, I was angry over a procommunist biasness I saw in something you wrote, so I lost my cool. I am a new member, I never meant to start out like this, it's just, I read "The Black Book of Communism" recently, so I arrived with alot of emotions over that book, I am sincerely sorry, and I do apologize.

I also viewed your unbiasness to communist articles, so I do think you're fair, I'm sorry for saying what I did. Even though it was most definately *not* a threat to you, I d admit that it was wrong, and I am sincerely sorry, please forgive me.

I would like to contribute to Wiki, I don't wish to be a vandal, I just was new to this, so I made a mistake in getting too emotional. It was more of a random assault, I read that book, I saw communist apologists on many threads, so I began getting angry, so I snapped, I apologize! I will never lose my cool again, I know Wiki isn't about my POV, it's about learning/contributing to articles in a fair and balanced way, so I am truly sorry."Crud3w4re 04:09, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I've replaced your original indefinite block with a 48 hour block. In the meantime, please familiarise with our policies and guidelines as linked to below. --  Netsnipe  ►  05:04, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Apology (fromt he email) accepted. Please be civil in the future, and don't let others provoke you - or provoke them yourself. After the block reduced by Netsnipe expires, I hope you will never face one again. Take care,--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 05:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Invitation
If you would like to debate, without the rules and confines of wikipedia, you can make a comment on:.

A few months ago someone continually attacked my userpage, and was eventually permanently banned from wikipedia. Before he was banned, I also invited him to talk on my web blog, and he accepted.

I am actually surprised that you got permanently banned. I had no part in it, I only made the warnings on your page. I figured your past behavior was in the past, and I was only going to report you if it continued.

I have actually disagre with strongly Ruy on a lot of issues User_talk:Ruy_Lopez, and I argue that you two probably have more in common than you may realize.

Anyway, don't let the your boot log get you down. I was infinitely banned once too, and I am still here. Check out my block log.... 09:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Debate? Debate about what? I just thought that in every communist article I came across, there were Russian Communist apologists in every one of them, so I got angry, but I learned my lesson gto not deal with things in the way that I did. Just like you don't see Nazi apologists in the Hitler discussion, they would probably be on the other end of a name calling, so I tried to "level out" the biasness. If people read more into the communist record in the past, they would know that Nazism dwarfs in comaprison.


 * It's a shame when one flawed mass murdering system is held at a double standard, or is that just me? It's quite obvious that the Soviet Union never got what they deserve, I just hope that Russian Communist apologists will understand that their system was flawed, resorted to mass murder, mass starvations, gulag holocausts, and purges that results in the deaths of over a hundred million. What is there to defend there? What good did it do?


 * Let's see: Created a militaristic economic devastated eastern europe, ran over people with tanks if they protested, and just pretty much supressed everyone into an iron curtain. I think people from the east are still brainwashed to this day by the years of propaganda, they call people "fascist" when they don't like something about them, obviously not actually researching the word!


 * A researcher would know that being called a fascist is actually laughable, let me just show you some unpropaganized fascism:


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manifesto_of_the_Fascist_Struggle


 * "Contents of the Fascist Manifesto


 * The Manifesto (published in "Popolo d'Italia" on June 6, 1919) is divided into four sections, describing Fascist objectives in political, social, military and financial fields.


 * Politically, the Manifesto calls for:


 * Universal suffrage polled on a regional basis, with proportional representation and voting and electoral office eligibility for women;


 * Proportional representation on a regional basis;


 * Voting for women (which was opposed by most other European nations);


 * Representation at government level of newly created National Councils by economic sector;


 * The abolition of the Italian Senate (At the time, the Senate, as the upper house of parliament, was by process elected by the wealthier citizens, but were in reality direct appointments by the King. It has been described as a sort of extended council of the Crown);


 * The formation of a National Council of experts for labor, for industy, for transportation, for the public health, for communications, etc. Selections to be made of professionals or of tradesmen with legislative powers, and elected directly to a General Commission with ministerial powers. (this concept was rooted in corporatist ideology and derived in part from Catholic social doctrine)


 * In labour and social policy, the Manifesto calls for:


 * The quick enactment of a law of the State that sanctions an eight-hour workday for all workers;
 * A minimum wage;


 * The participation of workers' representatives in the functions of industry commissions;


 * To show the same confidence in the labor unions (that prove to be technically and morally worthy) as is given to industry executives or public servants;


 * Reorganisation of the railways and the transport sector;


 * Revision of the draft law on invalidity insurance;


 * Reduction of the retirement age from 65 to 55.


 * In military affairs, the Manifesto advocates:


 * Creation of a short-service national militia with specifically defensive responsibilities;


 * Armaments factories are to be nationalised;


 * A peaceful but competitive foreign policy.


 * In finance, the Manifesto advocates:


 * A strong progressive tax on capital (envisaging a “partial expropriation” of concentrated wealth);


 * The seizure of all the possessions of the religious congregations and the abolition of all the bishoprics, which constitute an enormous liability on the Nation and on the privileges of the poor;


 * Revision of all contracts for military provisions;


 * The revision of all military contracts and the seizure of 85 percent of the profits therein.


 * The Manifesto thus combined elements of contemporary democratic and progressive thought (franchise reform, labour reform, limited nationalisation, taxes on wealth and war profits) with corporatist emphasis on class collaboration (the idea of social classes existing side by side and collaborating for the sake of national interests; the opposite of the Marxist notion of class struggle)."


 * 1. Rights for women.
 * 2. 8 hour works days.
 * 3. Minimum wage and more...


 * Seems more progressive than the so-called progressive! They MUST be referring to Nazism when they call people fascists? Ah, yes, well, yes, Nazism was very brutal to a certain minority of people, but it was hell of alot better than Communism ;)Nazis originally wanted to ship jews to Madagascar, so if that's true, then it doesn't seem like they all just started with the intentions of mass murdering millions of jews. I'm not a Nazi apologist, I agknowledge their wrongs, I just know that noone has agknowledged the wrongs of Communism, that the victims are either dead or afraid to speak out.


 * On a side note, I am still autoblocked I believe :(Crud3w4re 17:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Consensus
I will agree that Nazism AND Communism were both pretty bad in their own ways, without induldging into details on the two systems. But what most people miss is that there was good things that came from Nazism, hence they took Germany out of the depression, there are also good points about Communism, I just get angry when everything is one-sided.

I support the NPOV policy here. When I enter a Nazi article, I know there will be hellacious POV violations, as there will be in Communist articles, so it's almost a neverending battle to battle public opinion with neutrality.

Okay, well, I hope to contribute well to Wikipedia with a wholesome NPOV, but I will be lurking Communist articles with sources at hand for sure. :)

I felt I might've seemed a bit of a Nazi apologist in the last section of my talk page, that's why I felt compelled to create a consensus that I know that both were pretty brutal, but that it's not right to be completely one-sided, it's been 66 years since the end of ww2 c'mon!

Were there Americans in ww2 battling eachother for the Civil War that happened 80 years their senior? I don't think so. There comes a time when you have to stop taking sides and to start having a NPOV, everyone involved in ww2 will be dead in a few years, so it really does no point to keep pushing an old agenda. Everything isn't one-sided, you were fed propaganda as was the Axis nations were fed their own forms of propaganda, but you must know, it all comes down to one thing.. “History is written by the victors.”

By the way, it seems that I'm still on permban autoblock? Crud3w4re 18:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No you are not, at least if I am reading this right: If the ban is only for 48 hours, and you have been blocked since 22nd, maybe you can now be unblocked.  E-mail the admins who blocked you, by going to their page, and clicking E-mail this user on the side toolbox. Travb (talk) 22:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh. I looked on the "block list" and it said "autoblock", so I thought that it was still in effect, but okay, maybe not then?Crud3w4re 00:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)