User talk:Horologium/March 2011

Horologium
Regarding Sarah Palin and death panels: I've never seen any other issue where a local "consensus" is as persistently, deliberately, year after rear dishonest as on this one issue. What Palin said about this is extremely relevant to Palin (reflects many statements she made over a period of months), extremely well-documented and well known. You can keep immediately keep mass deleting like mad within seconds, and do so, but I've never seen a more persistently, emotionally, deliberately dishonest "consensus." You keep immediately mass-deleting all other Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion with the sole excuse that a "consensus" of liars can keep lying anyhow, regardless of all rules to the contrary.Jimmuldrow (talk) 15:26, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not getting involved in editing this or any other real-world politics-related issue on Wikipedia, but I've got this to say: excluding information is not the same as dishonesty, and it's pretty uncivil of you to equate the two in the accusatory way you're doing it now. There are many reasons to exclude information from Wikipedia (this being one of the primary ones). How well these reasons apply here I cannot say, but the point is that people can and do honestly and in good faith disagree about whether to include verifiable content and that this is what Horologium is doing now, not "lying". Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

ANI
Hi Horologium. Sorry about that but I made a report on ANI dealing with user Freshstart101 and user:Hohenloh in which you are mentioned. Thank you. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 19:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)