Line 637:
Ahh, yes! Thanks again! [[User:YoSoyUnHamster|YoSoyUnHamster]] ([[User talk:YoSoyUnHamster|talk]]) 16:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
== Removing my question ==
Hi, I'm ready to remove my question and vote. However I would request a voluntary interaction ban between you and me, though that's not a precondition or anything. (I also think I deserve an apology, but I can live without one.) Best, ''[[User:Manul|Manul]] ~ [[User talk:Manul|talk]]'' 02:32, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
:Liz, I would not give this any consideration. The question reflects badly on its poser and not on you. --[[User:NeilN|<b style="color:navy">Neil<span style="color:red">N</span></b>]] <sup>[[User talk:NeilN|<i style="color:blue">talk to me</i>]]</sup> 02:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
::{{u|NeilN}}, like I said I am ready to remove it, but not because it reflects badly on me, which is a puzzling aspersion. I'm just ready to leave it behind. ''[[User:Manul|Manul]] ~ [[User talk:Manul|talk]]'' 03:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
:::NeilN was suggesting that Liz ignore the voluntary interaction ban request. I don't know what this is all about (though I did see your exchange on Blade's page) but asking someone who may be an admin in a few days to essentially recuse themselves from discussions involving you is not exactly designed to reflect well on you. You may be making the suggestion in good faith but it is up there near the top of the lousy ideas list. Just saying! --[[User:RegentsPark|regentspark]] <small>([[User talk:RegentsPark|comment]])</small> 18:35, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
::::[[User:Manul|Manul]], this is confusing to me because I have had no contact with you since you were known as Vzaak, a rename which seems to have happened during my wikibreak. And while we had different points of view, this is not uncommon on Wikipedia. Then, out of the blue, you post on my RfA and send me a long email message detailing all of my faults and how unworthy I am to be an admin. I didn't respond to that email and I didn't respond to you on my RfA so I'm not sure what interaction you want to ban. I've looked through my contributions to user talk pages and found that I posted once to your talk page on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Manul&diff=prev&oldid=583717131 November 28, 2013] which anyone can check out.
::::If you want a voluntary interaction ban, I think that would be helped if you stop talking about me and about disputes that occurred two years ago and I promise not to mention you either. I'm just sorry you can't get past an old talk page argument. I'm sure that we have both moved on since 2013. <font face="Papyrus" size="4" color="#800080">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</font></sup> 20:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
:::::Liz, you were one of my on-wiki harassers, applauding the polemics that were falsely attacking me and other Wikipedia editors.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%20talk:Askahrc&diff=prev&oldid=597229601] The polemics were based on the (provably false) notion that [[User:Manul/Tumbleman_sockpuppetry|this person]] had been wrongly accused of sockpuppetry, a notion you helped promote.
:::::Do you still believe that [[User:Manul/Tumbleman_sockpuppetry|this person]] was not sockpuppeting? Your past statements on the matter continue to be cited in an harassment campaign targeting Wikipedia editors that remains active and extends to the present day. Your upcoming status as an admin is likely to further legitimize this harassment. ''[[User:Manul|Manul]] ~ [[User talk:Manul|talk]]'' 02:26, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
:::::: I don't recall any harassment I committed and I don't see that a dispute in October 2013 contributes to an ongoing harassment campaign against you. I did question the SPI investigation into Tumbleman's account back then but I don't recall continuing to claim his innocence after this investigation was closed.
:::::: I disagreed with you and your approach to other editors which I thought demonstrated a lack of good faith. But disagreement is not harassment and I think all parties in that Sheldrake dispute were guilty of dishing out inappropriate amounts of sarcasm. I know Barney posted a lot on my talk page pointedly ridiculing me. I have not edited in the pseudoscience area since then and I chalk up this Tumbleman incident to my naivete as a newly active editor who thought a fellow editor was being bullied. That was my perception 21 months ago and my opinion would be different if it occurred today.
:::::: I also disagree that the misguided defense I made for another editor almost two years ago would legitimize any current harassment against you. <font face="Papyrus" size="4" color="#800080">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</font> <sup><font face="Times New Roman" color="#006400">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</font></sup> 15:18, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Liz, thank you for acknowledging that your defense of Tumbleman at the SPI was misguided. That means a lot, and it eases my mind a bit. Until at least March of last year, you had applauded the defamation campaign against me which posited that Tumbleman was innocent and that I had been falsely accusing editors of being Tumbleman sockpuppets in order to get them banned because of their point of view.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%20talk:Askahrc&diff=prev&oldid=597229601] It was wrong of you to do so -- ''regardless'' of how you felt about the SPI -- and I considered your behavior to be harassment. ''[[User:Manul|Manul]] ~ [[User talk:Manul|talk]]'' 19:12, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
: I was going to make the above my final comment, but considering the general lack of comprehension I see here and elsewhere, I need to say something more.
: Above you said, "I disagreed with you and your approach to other editors which I thought demonstrated a lack of good faith." This accusation is emblematic of the toxic atmosphere that you helped promote in 2013 and 2014, which you have now carried to the present day. The apparent basis of your aspersion (you do not provide one) is that I filed SPIs -- SPIs which admins affirmed as containing sufficient evidence of sockpuppeting. Until your RfA I hadn't said a negative word about you, even as I watched you join with a known sockpuppeteer to falsely disparage and bully me, promoting the hogwash that [[User:Manul/Tumbleman_sockpuppetry|another sockpuppeteer]] was being wrongly persecuted by me for socking.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%20talk:Askahrc&diff=prev&oldid=597229601]
: You said above that you "don't recall continuing to claim his innocence after this investigation was closed", yet the link in the very comment to which you replied shows that you did. With regard to the other sockpuppeteer, you also continued to claim his innocence after the investigation was closed,[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Askahrc&diff=599298958&oldid=599164761] as I mentioned in my oppose vote at RfA.
: Though I credit you for (finally) acknowledging your mistake regarding the Tumbleman SPI, I am more concerned that there wasn't an acknowledgment -- let alone an indication of remorse -- regarding your participation in this bullying. And not only was it bullying, but it was bullying based upon fabrications that everyone had recognized as such but you. ''[[User:Manul|Manul]] ~ [[User talk:Manul|talk]]'' 15:43, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
== Thank you ==
|