Talk:Jonathan Sarfati: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 270:

::::::::He has also abused admin powers to bully opponents by threatening and banning them, on the flimsiest excuse that they might have connections to Sarfati himself (just look at his paranoia with Philip Rayment above). Of course, the real reason is that they undid some of his OR and Verify violations. While he hinds behind that ArbCom ruling, that was ''clearly illegal and exceeding their authority'', because Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, has explicitly stated that there is no rule agaimst editing one's own articles, and indeed, ''he has edited his own bio page''. So how can an ArbCom ruling be valid if it contradicts the founder's own rules? FeloniousMonk was another admin who was cited in the ruling for tendentious editing, yet he has abused his power in the same way by banning his opponents. Known tendentious admins should certainly be forbidden from banning their ideological opponents. [[User:58.162.2.122|58.162.2.122]] 03:17, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

: Oh hi Jonathan- a reminder not to engage in personal attacks (and once again Jonathan, I'm not an atheist and if I were it would be irrelevant to my edits). Also you misintrepet what the policy is- someone can edit their own bio - that's the default status although it is not generally recommended. That is completely consistent with the ArbCom deciding that you cannot edit yours by virtue of your disruption and POV pushing. If you think that the ArbCom overstepped their bounds then go talk to Jimbo, in the meantime try to cut out the personal attacks and let's discuss the matter at hand, ok? [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 03:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

==Aritcle condensation==