Defending Rob
Fragment of a discussion from User talk:Blue
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
There are malicious edits and then there are ones out of humour. I believe my edit of Robs page was in the latter category considering his repeated accusations of sock puppetry.
Yeah, but when you do it repeatedly and it turns into an edit war with people abusing their sysop rights to lock the page (with the vandalism intact) and block an editor who is undoing the vandalism, it's no longer very humeurous.
Then why would anyone revert it anyway and a) not let Rob do it (considering it wasn't malicious, rude or insulting) and b) ignore my explanation? Are we to be completely hamstringed by rules? When did RW's humour nuts get chopped off? Note I added the same edit to Milakos page (whom Rob accused me of being) and Dick added it to mine