Wikipedia:Policy enforcement log/race and intelligence

Drummond aka DAD and Zen-master

 * proposed 2 hour block each to Drummond (contribs) and Zen-master (contribs), for repeated personal remarks directed against each other at talk:race and intelligence which disrupt discussion of improvements to the article. -- Uncle Ed (talk) June 30, 2005 20:15 (UTC)
 * Drummond: "your conduct has just crossed the line", "more level-headed contributors"
 * Zen-master: "I hope you enjoy your jail cell"


 * How is that a personal attack? The use of language propaganda (lying) is a crime in many places, if someone can explain it I will withdraw my prediction. zen master T 30 June 2005 20:30 (UTC)


 * I'd like to point out Ed Poor is by no means neutral nor can be considered a mediator on this issue. The issue is under discussion on the talk page by numerous people. Where are the citations for the claim of personal attacks? zen master T 30 June 2005 20:22 (UTC)


 * Also note, User:Arbor supports the same unscientific POV presentation of Race and intelligence as User:Ed Poor and User:Drummond. zen master T 30 June 2005 20:30 (UTC)

As a witness to this, I'd like to put in my concern that saying a user has crossed the line and is not being a level-headed editor is not the same as disrupting an article for 2 and 1/2 weeks and continually repeating accusations of Nazism. It's a nice idea to apply a censure evenly across two opposing sides, but one of the sides has been acting in good faith, and the other has, yes, been acting in bad faith, as evidenced, for example, by his making 5 reversions in one day, even after being warned. Note that said editor still hasn't apologized, although Drummond did immediately. Drummond should have been applauded for having the patience to deal with said editor for so long--Nectarflowed T 3 July 2005 06:54 (UTC)


 * That was more than a few days ago, where are recent citations? I do stand by my original statement that I can think of no other explanation for some editors behavior but since then I have refrained from labeling people directly and refrained from using terms such as "nazi-esque" generally. My recent "reverts" were of a partial nature working towards cleaning up numerous neutrality violations, what is User:Nectarflowed's excuse for full reverts? Also note User:Nectarflowed is seemingly disingenuously attacking me on two fronts while presenting the issue without the full context as we both just recently agreed to seek arbitration for the race and intelligence dispute, see . zen master T 3 July 2005 07:48 (UTC)
 * My witness comment above was intended as a defense for Drummond in this censure. Here is the citation you request.--Nectarflowed T 3 July 2005 08:24 (UTC)


 * I stand by that statement as well, how is it a personal attack? I am theorizing explanations or motivations for people's statements and talk page behavior such as obfuscation. The scale and scope of repetition designed to exploit presumption inducing language and one sided framing is what I find infinitely curious. My offer to withdraw my theory and apologize if someone can explain the repetition remains open. zen master T 3 July 2005 08:32 (UTC)

This matter has been referred to the arbcom, as of july 2 or july 3, by user:nectarflowed. -- Uncle Ed (talk) July 4, 2005 17:23 (UTC)