User talk:70.44.24.245

Unblock request declined

This blocked user has had their unblock request reviewed by one or more administrators, who has/have reviewed and declined this request.
Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason.
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Request reason: I removed the part that was considered vandalism as you can see here. Other users have since reverted my edits without explanation despite my attempts to have them bring it up on the talk page. The behavior of users here only proves my point that Wikimedia is controlled by the homosexual agenda. 70.44.24.245 21:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason: your bigotry seems to be showing. The sexuality of an editor is irrelevant, argue the facts, and accept the consensus. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:22, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

block log
gblock log
blocklist
stalktoy
guc
unblock
gunblock
contribs: +/-

@Operator873: — billinghurst sDrewth 09:20, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request declined

This blocked user has had their unblock request reviewed by one or more administrators, who has/have reviewed and declined this request.
Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason.
Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Request reason: I am not a bigot, and I have had enough of your name-calling. None of the editors I interacted with were homosexual, so your "sexuality is irrelevant" comment is means nothing. As for the facts, I was simply arguing that Wikimedia's homosexual group has been involved in a years long, cross-wiki attempt to introduce pro-homosexual bias into articles. They also use charges of "homophobia" and "bigotry" as ways of harassing those who are not fully on board with this plan. When I tried to argue these facts, I was met with charges of "Clear vandalism and possible homophobic edits". I gave other users every chance to discuss this, and they shut me down. It is clear from your response and the other users' comments that Wikimedia is completely on the side of the homosexual agenda. This aforementioned homosexual group is responsible for this, and I propose that it be shut down by consensus. 70.44.24.245 21:06, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason: The dog turd simile applies here. If it looks like bigotry and it smells like bigotry, don't expect me to taste it. I have independently reviewed what you have said, after you were blocked by another administrator. So I hear that you don't like what I think that I am seeing; so is the problem with my interpretation or your presentation?

You are clearly not listening to yourself, let alone others. I am editing across multiple wikis and for many years, and have seen zero sexuality bias either way. You sound to be the one hung up here. You casually throw accusations around and think that it is just okay, it is not. Firstly there is nothing wrong with homosexuals, I believe that you will find that they are human beings, just like you and me. Secondly, they are entitled to have an agenda and to propose it if they so please (see w:humans rights). The community can reach a consensus on whether they accept their agenda based on the rationale and the proposal. If it has good rationale and is a good proposal it makes no difference to me whether it is a homosexual agenda or not. Any such previous homosexual agenda proposals have not changed my sexuality in the ten years I have been here, nor how or where, or what I edit.

Grow up. I suggest that you leave those pages alone and go and edit elsewhere. Plenty of things to do around the wikis. I don't think that an unblock is warranted, and it definitely has not been suitably presented by you that it is of value to the wiki. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:45, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

block log
gblock log
blocklist
stalktoy
guc
unblock
gunblock
contribs: +/-

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user who has not created an account yet, or who does not use it. We therefore have to use the numerical IP address to identify them. Such an IP address can be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users.