he didn't present any evidence that he was a sysop. I know what you're going to say:"innocent until proven guilty". If I said I was the president of the US, would you assume that I was until proven otherwise? It's really the same thing.

--LittleDan

Oliver Pereira <omp199@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:

On Fri, 30 May 2003 a.crossman@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:

> Please see [[User talk:Viking/ban]]

This page has just been deleted by [[User:Kils]], who is a sysop. He also
deleted [[User:Viking]] shortly afterwards. His explanations in the
comment box for both deletions were: "project of my children - deleted
after threats".

> User:Viking has been nominated for a ban by Mbecker, seconded by
> Wapcaplet, thirded by me, fourthed by Dante, fifthed by CGS. No
> opposition at the time of writing (except from Viking).

> Actions include censorship of sex-related pages; totally false claims
> that he was a sysop, to intimidate users and make them stop
> criticising him; suggesting that the reason someone wanted to know
> the identity of his sysop account was so that they could hurt his
> children, and so on. General unpleasantness.

What evidence can you present that Viking's claims of sysop status were
false?

Oliver

+-------------------------------------------+
| Oliver Pereira |
| Dept. of Electronics and Computer Science |
| University of Southampton |
| omp199@ecs.soton.ac.uk |
+-------------------------------------------+

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Do you Yahoo!?
Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).