[WikiEN-l] 3RR applied to both parties?

Fri Mar 4 05:42:26 UTC 2005

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:19:14 -0700, slimvirgin at gmail.com
<slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> If Geni's interpretation of 3RR is correct, then we have an unwinnable
> game of tic tac toe going on against editors trying to keep nonsense
> out of articles. Within four hours:
> 
> Skyring inserted a falsehood
> Adam reverted: Adam's #1 revert
> Skyring re-inserted it: Skyring's #1 revert
> Adam reverted: Adam's #2 revert
> Skyring re-inserted it:" Skyring's #2 revert
> Adam reverted: Adam's #3 revert
> Skyring re-inserted it: Skyring's #3 revert
> Adam reverted: Adam's #4 revert.
> Skyring calls the cops.

As noted above, this is not the case. My insertion was a matter of
fact - namely because the term head of state is not defined in the
constitution it is a matter  of contention rather than convention. As
I have demonstrated.

Adam's four reverts took place within a matter of hours, but during
that time we were discussing the issue. Adam became increasingly
abusive when asked to provide checkable sources, I waited twelve hours
and seeing no resumption of the discussion I reported him.

All this can be checked, and that's the beauty of Wikipedia.

-- 
Peter in Canberra