User talk:NorthBySouthBaranof/Archives/2020/July

Bundy standoff edits
Hi, NorthBySouthBaranof. I have reverted your revert as the original violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view. The biased original cherry-picks part of the Constitutional authority while misleading readers by omitting the other half of the Constitution's governance concerning federal ownership of property. It's not opinion. It's a direct quote straight from the Constitution itself. Furthermore, my edit fully preserves all references to Supreme Court's rulings. And frankly, NorthBySouthBaranof, I summarily reject your insinuation that direct quotes from the Constitution for the United States of American are "fringe dissenting opinions." Please refrain from defaming our nation's laws in such a deprecating manner. The Constitution is, by internal proclamation, "the supreme Law of the Land." Both the remainder of your opinions of the Supreme Court Opinions are, by your own wording, "opinions." Direct quotes from the Constitution are not opinions, ergo, no such original research as you errantly claim took place. I do not advocate either the position of the rancher or the authorities. I do, however, firmly advocate for full inclusion of the relevant Constitutional clauses. SUGGESTION: Why don't you include your "same point..." as you shared above. Do, however, leave the quote and reference to the Constitution in place, as it's directly applicable. If it weren't, SCOTUS wouldn't have seen fit to include it in their opinion. In the meantime, Wikipedia isn't a law journal. It's an encyclopedia. It's critical to include mention of the basis behind the rancher's actions. Without it, this isn't an article. It's an indictment.Clepsydrae (talk) 16:47, 22 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The quote is and always shall be germane: "being at once relevant and appropriate : FITTING." I'm sorry your opinion runs counter to "the supreme Law of the Land," NorthBySouthBaranof, but the law will forever remain law and your opinion will forever remain opinion.  It find it shameful you and others work so hard against Wikipedia's goal of providing objective, relevant content.  Cherry-picking serves no one.Clepsydrae (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

No-fault FYI DS alert for US politics post 1932
NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As you probably know these are just FYI, although they do "turn on" the possibility of sudden admin action for violations of the underlying admin decision. For details see links in the standardized message.  I am going to give them to others in the conversation too. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)