Forum:Complaints about Gothemasticator's ban of User:Luckmann

I recently gave Luckmann a year block for racist content on his user page. My action has engendered numerous complaints on my talk page. I submit the whole discussion for community discussion and review here. If you'd like to discuss this further, please read the long passages below and post your comments in the Discussion section at the bottom. Thank you.

The recent year-long ban of Luckmann
Copied from Luckmann's talk page:

The image of your pony avatar has stood for quite a while, even though it is borderline racist commentary. However, your recent additions to your user page--naming the pony avatar "purebreed" and the inclusion of the phrase "master race" in one of your user boxes--create a racist statement out of your user page as a whole, especially considering your past here at The Vault.

Therefore, you are blocked forever. Goodbye.--Gothemasticator 02:54, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

Complaints
Copied from my own talk page:

If this is over the 'Purebred' and 'master race' comments I'd like to point out 2 things. Firstly the Purebred statement refered to horses themselves, secondly the PC Master race thing was a joke refering to how PCs are better than consoles due to their upgradability, neither of these was targeted as a racist comment, and many other users did not see these as racist either and I feel this makes the block unfair as no warning was issued over the comments which were controversial at best. - Crazy Sam10 Talk User blog:Crazy sam10 15:41, September 14, 2011 (UTC)
 * All of these things were small, and only came together if they’re in-depth analysed, and most weren't added at the same time, but instead gradually over time to see if the wording was adequate (which with no warning he assumed it was). As I've said, whilst other users know of Luckmann's views they don't find what he added to be offensive and as previously stated in my earlier comment the master race was a joke about PCs, not aimed at any person, and I myself have seen other users use it in a joke. His purebred comment was used at it is the term used for animals and that is why he choose to use it, as it is for animals, such as ponies. This makes me feel his words have been looked into too deeply and has caused him to gain another block. - Crazy Sam10 Talk User blog:Crazy sam10[[File:ShadowAttackSmallAni.gif]] 16:40, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

Luckmann didn't mean anything remotely racist, and assuming that he did is a poor display of administrative behaviour. It is imperative you remove the indefinite ban on him. What technicality will you catch him on next? That his Rarity avatar has a hat which remotely resembles a Nazi officer cap? Time to get real, as Sam said above you looked far too deeply into what he said, however whether you did this as an attempt to find something to ban him on, or just a misjudgment is yet to be revealed. I'm going to expect that you've just misjudged the situation, in which case you should issue an unban and apologise to Luckmann. --Callofduty4 17:12, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

I have to support this ban. His beliefs are shown clear throughout his speeches and videos and he challenges authority to point out these beliefs while leaving subtle meanings where he thinks he can avoid retribution. It seems to me that he likes to push buttons to see what sort of reactions he can stir up. Skål! 17:21, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

Why is Luckmann being banned anyway? Unless a wide array of people complain and he doesn't show his views everywhere in a bad manner, he's fine. The British Empire have done two millennia of raping lands, torturing innocents, slave trade triangle, and imperial conquests. Does that mean we should ban all British flags? And arguably the US have done crimes against the Middle East, Vietnam, etc. Should we ban US flags too because of that?

I also noticed while I was an anon, you said that people can use Spetsnaz flags however, who have done things equally bad as Nazism. You can't just say one thing is okay and that everything else isn't. You can't just use one size fits all. Undead Hat 19:08, September 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * I told you in chat to drop the "British flag" thing. Viewing and judging such events from centuries ago from a modern perspective makes absolutely no sense, and with that logic almost any country flag could be considered "offensive" as most have done something "wrong" (highly subjective) at some point. It holds absolutely no weight in any argument regarding the relatively recent Nazi imagery. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 20:40, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, there's nothing wrong with calling himself "aryan" it may be commanly used with racisum yes, but the word it's self is just a description also, 'pre breed' is also, strickly speaking not wrong either as both blonde hair and blue eyes are the weaker genes they're most likely (statistically) that someone with blue eyes had atleat one blue eyed parent, meaning there has been less of a gene mix with people with differnet colour eyes. Seeing as a pure bread is just the same race having been bread, there's nothing actually wrong with calling something "pure bread". If he was to say it made him better than people who were, for example, black then yes that is racist. But a description of what he is isnt racist. 19:06, September 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree, Luckmann has been banned because of something that clearly wasn't racist. If you want to keep him banned for no reason, then do it. It just makes the entire administrative team look bad if a user who did nothing wrong is banned. You're acting as if he even offended anyone, he didn't mean to, and if he did, he would have done so with much more gusto. It should be clear from what he said that he's not a racist and he isn't a Nazi. You even restricted his right to argue this out, that's such a poor call of action and makes it look as if he had something to say that would be enough to get him unbanned, but you don't want him unbanned, so you decided to revoke his ability to talk to you about it. Very unimpressive behaviour by two trusted administrators, I must say. --Callofduty4 20:50, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

I'm sure no one appreciates your ignorant banter. He has been given a lot more chances then most, and has been given a lot of wriggle room. You speak as if you know him personally and have witnessed every moment of trouble that he has given this site (Or the other way around). I'm not necessarily defending the point that he was being truly racist under this recent incident, but he hasn't given anyone the benefit of the doubt either. Skål! 20:55, September 14, 2011 (UTC)


 * And equally, I'm sure no one appreciates your ignorant banter on his talk page, comparing his edit count to the number of the devil is both obscene and is absolutely unwarranted. Then you had the audacity to undo my edit commenting it out, citing that I can be banned for what I did, almost as if you were trying to make some legitimate point, when all you were doing was trying to make him feel worse. I'm not going to be able to trust a guy who decides to deface the blocked user's talk page with obscene and rude messages in an attempt to offend/be funny, and then has the pure audacity to undo a rightful edit removing it. --Callofduty4 20:08, September 15, 2011 (UTC)

I do not wish to insight any anger or anything here but I have to stick up for Luckmann. After speaking with numerous people it has become clear that nobody has been offended by him, rather we actually like him as a user. I do accept that he has been given warnings before but I disagree that you blame him for flouting his views around. Not once has Luckmann's political or any other views come across in a conversation, he is polite and always a pleasure to talk to. He will be sorely missed by many. Most people don't even care, he didn't bait people into political debate, he didn't force his views upon anyone etc. I agree with things that have been said that (again I understand that he has been given numerous warnings) it is unfair to target Luckmann when there are, I am sure, other users with questionable content upon their pages. And even if you did see what was written as racist, it was a joke. How many people can you find in this world that hasn't told an offesive joke? There will be few. If we set out to censor the whole world so that nobody was offended it would be a dull place indeed. We can't do it, there is no pleasing everyone so we just have to get on with it. There are stigmas and stereotypes attached to everything these days. Would you ban a user that was constantly telling women to "get back in the kitchen and make me a sammich"? Even if the female laughed it off and didn't care? If she replied in kind? If the society as a whole has no issue with it then why find issue? I have seen numerous times on this Wiki power being abused for the holders own gain, it seems as if because there was bad blood between yourselves and Luckmann you have had your vision clouded by a red mist. A year is a hell of a long time for a joke. Anyway, I have said my piece and I hope you respect what I have said. I can guarentee if you speak with other users they will back me up on the whole issue of Luckmann being a great guy and never forcing things down other users throats. Please keep this in mind, I miss him dearly Miss Nicolletalk 01:24, September 15, 2011 (UTC)


 * You are seeing monsters where there are none. I might support this ban, but my comment was not one of provocation. It was merely a joke (Even if it was in bad taste) and you need to stop using that as a way to personally attack me. This man has a questionable background and he has one for very good reasons. He has always hinted at his political views, and has even stated on different occasions about his beliefs for there never being a Holocaust. You are defending him without even knowing what you're talking about or even the full picture of why we're discussing this in the first place. No one cares if he never talked or behaved like this to you personally, that's not the point. Ontop of that... your logic is exceptionally flawed. I have done my research before throwing myself into this arguement, have you? I doubt it since you are denouncing known facts about this man while insulting the Administration here at the same time. Maybe you should stop being so childish in your insinuations? Skål! 04:27, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

Gothemasticator's response
Copied from CrazySam's talk page:

Luckmann has been blocked previously for the use of the term "aryan race" -- racism. He was also previously warned to leave his racist ideology off The Vault. The pony avatar he created -- starkly white with blonde hair and an iron cross emblem -- coupled with the newly added "purebreed" term -- constitute the same racist statement as the use of the word "aryan" in conjunction with race. The use of the term "master race" in his pc-user userbox by itself would, of course, be fine, albeit in bad taste. However, in conjunction with the pony avatar and "purebreed" entry in the race field of the infobox, the use of the term "master race" shows that Luckmann is just trying to skirt the letter of the law. The guy is a known neo-nazi racist, and when you take all of this content together, it is clear that he is disregarding the instruction to leave his ideology out of things. I stand by my block.--Gothemasticator 16:25, September 14, 2011 (UTC)

Other germane things to read

 * Discussion from Luckmann's talk page regarding his last block.
 * Forum discussion about totalitarian symbols following Luckmann's previous block.
 * Luckmann's recent post on the talk page of a Wikia staff member.

Community discussion
First, let me say that whatever Luckmann's views may or may not have been (he never explicitly expressed them to me, so I won't comment), he was a very pleasant person to converse with. Anyways, I have to support his ban. Reading his talk page, its incredibly plain that he knew absolutely to not post anything related to any kind of racial ideology. Several different admins warned him, and even banned him, over these things, not to mention the HUGE fiasco a few months back involving Tagaziel. I agree with what other users have already expressed, basically saying that the most changes to his user page were not in themselves worth a yearlong ban, although I don't know how anyone could interpret "The Glorious PC Master Race" as anything other than a reference to Aryanism and Nazism is beyond me. Despite that, not worth a year. But, given his history and the multiple warnings/blocks, I have to support the ban and its length. He knew better. BILLYOCEAN 04:08, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

I myself would like to point out I do not believe the ban should of been issued. I feel, as I've stated before, his comments have been looked into in too much depth, he's never tried to force his views down anyone’s throats and he's always been pleasurable to converse with. These comments, even if they were somehow connected to his views, where very subtly and in no way offensive to anyone, in fact they had been worded specifically so that one would look at the word and think of the pony (by using purebred). The subtlety of these comments makes me feel a warning should have been issued stating these comments were close to borderline as I, and many other users, had difficulty in finding any offense in them at first glance. - Crazy Sam10 Talk User blog:Crazy sam10 15:39, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * I have read this thread and the various links and felt most connected to LeonGaroux's words, primarily that he could be pushing the limits to see how far he can go with his userpage. As I see it, he used purebred and master race in such a way it can be explained in two ways, like already mentioned elsewhere. He's been given a warning, a block, and after that block a warning to not add nazi references again. Whatever he meant by it, he should have played it more safe and have avoided subtle hints. Given that, I can understand Goth's 1 year block. However, it's possible he added those 2 words for a different meaning. It's not likely, but possible. And he's not spreading his beliefs in the chat, I hear. All in all, I feel most for a Solomon's judgment, 3 months block, with a permanent block after another mistake on his page. Jspoel Speech Jspoel.png 17:30, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with this ban, it is violating the common rules of decency for user pages, no different than the 9/11 vid Tezzla had. He has been warned from the very first instance and has chosen to ignore those warnings going forward. There is no other course of action we can take but to ban. I would go into the details a bit more, but I think I have said enough on the matter in past instances and it wont make of a difference. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 19:27, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * Firstly, he self identifies as a Nazi (as seen on Sanse's user page), and isn't ashamed of the fact. More than enough reason for a permaban.  Even if, as he later tried to suggest on Sanse's page this is all a big misunderstanding, his response was very childish - rather than saying "Im not trying to be racist, therefore its okay" he should have replied something like "oh, sorry, didn't think it could be misconstrued that way - more than happy to remove if its upsetting someone".  I'm not aware of anyone using the term "arayan" except when talking about the Hitler lead Nazi party and I would have taken it to be nazi supremist talk myself - luckmann simply should have accepted that what he said could be taken the wrong way (as evidently it has), changed it to something non-contraversial, and move on.  TLDR version: The Permaban is justified, I would have probably done the same thing in the same situation,   Agent c 20:03, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

I have to lump myself in with Grizzly's opinion of this whole situation and I personally fully support this block. Nazi or not, there's a point where the warnings should have gotten through, and they obviously didn't. Other than that, I'd prefer to not get involved with this fiasco at all. Nitty Tok. 20:12, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * I personally thought the hat was a attendant's :P --Smuff[  The cake is a lie  ] 21:04, September 16, 2011 (UTC)

He's a good person, clearly Goth doesn't know how to assume any good faith and banned him on a technicality. Anyone who could properly evaluate the situation would know Luckmann was just joking. If administrators can't take the occasional joke, they are not fit for the position, to put it bluntly. Shortening the block would be a step in the right direction, removing it completely would be a leap in the right direction. Remember, if Luckmann really wanted to offend people, he would have done so with much more force. Also I'm pretty sure Nazis wouldn't have pictures of Communism-styled ponies with a red colour and golden Hammer and Sickle cutie mark. It's almost as if Goth just skipped over everything that could ruin his chances of blocking Luckmann, just to block him for a year and rather rudely post a flat "Goodbye" on his talk. That's not even close to acceptable behaviour and Goth should be ashamed of himself. What's more, "Pure breed" referring to the equine term is not offensive, clearly Goth did not read or even consider the context. Simply put this ban is unwarranted. --Callofduty4 21:17, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * You say "Anyone who could properly evaluate the situation". Yet I am noticing that all the people defending Luckmann and questioning this ban, are his friends from chat. This makes me question if those judgements are based on personal ties or not and are properly evaluating the situation. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 21:35, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * Yet you still continue to make baseless assumptions. I've spoken to Lightmann maybe once. I've seen him on chat a lot though and he doesn't stir up any trouble. --Callofduty4 21:53, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think his "Nazi" status is in dispute - He openly admitted to it on Sanses' talk page. I quote: "I honestly responded yes, I do in fact consider myself a national socialist".  You can also see he openly admits to it here if you go into the history on his talk page.  Now if this were a the Stable: A Horsebreeders Wiki, rather than the vault, there would be a good argument for saying that "Purebred" has been misunderstood, but that pic of a horse seems to have just been a (poor) attempt at plausible deniability. As for Arayan, from a self confessed nazi, that speaks for itself.Agent c 01:03, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

~Just realized that I put this in the wrong place before~ You are seeing monsters where there are none. I might support this ban, but my comment was not one of provocation. It was merely a joke (Even if it was in bad taste) and you need to stop using that as a way to personally attack me. This man has a questionable background and he has one for very good reasons. He has always hinted at his political views, and has even stated on different occasions about his beliefs for there never being a Holocaust. You are defending him without even knowing what you're talking about or even the full picture of why we're discussing this in the first place. No one cares if he never talked or behaved like this to you personally, that's not the point. Ontop of that... your logic is exceptionally flawed. I have done my research before throwing myself into this arguement, have you? I doubt it since you are denouncing known facts about this man while insulting the Administration here at the same time. Maybe you should stop being so childish in your insinuations? Skål! 22:21, September 16, 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry, continue..... seems you are taking things personally with statements like that, also it makes me question your own judgement on the whole situation, when you are so judgemental of others and not the situation. I was simply stating that I take those comments with a pinch of salt as there are personal ties. Less not forget I do watch chat a lot and also keep logs of chat. Frankly, I take both your statements as personal attacks at people and not the discussion, since they are worded in a condescending way. Firstly by implying that Goth cant properly evaluate the situation and that they are a bad admin, then saying that I make assumptions. Your comments do nothing but attack people involved and weaken your own stand point. As for assumptions, you make those yourself in your first statement. So I would suggest you stop with the ad hominem argument and focus on the actual discussion. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 00:26, September 17, 2011 (UTC)


 * EDIT, moved down from original complaints in reference to Cartmans response. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 18:05, September 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I feel this entire line of argument should be dropped. It is clear, with no offence intended, that you have no idea what you are talking about. How could the British Empire have perpetrated those things for 2000 years, i.e. before our year system and when there wasn't anything even remotely similar to a unified England, let alone Britain? Furthermore, there is no Spetznaz flag. I think you mean Soviet. Therefore, I must agree with Cart. TheGuardianCalligraphy.pngGuardianoftheWastesTag.png

I am sure he was referring to the Spetznaz fist, which is their emblem. Anyways, I think this arguing needs to stop. It was very obvious he was trying to test the limits of what he could get away with. This should be the end of this conversation.-- 18:17, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Crossposting a statement I posted on Sannse's talk page:

I believe that a statement from the "oppressors" is in order. I'm Tagaziel, one of the administrators of the Vault, and apparently I'm a horrible person. Joking aside, let me explain the rationale behind the decision to ban him (as I understand it). The first decision to ban him was not made lightly. It was for me, as a freedom-minded person, a conflict between the respecting the right of freedom of speech and thought and respect for the milions murdered by nazis and their supporters.

The tipping point came when I did a background check on Luckmann, in the form of a cursory examination of his DeviantArt account. While I understand that off-site matters shouldn't factor into administrative decisions, Luckmann's unmoderated behaviour there showed his views clearly and has convinced me that allowing him to remain on the Vault was not in its best interest:


 * Deep seated racism evident by referring to people of a dark complexion as, quote, "shitskins", unquote.
 * Declared Holocaust denier, as per this and this example.
 * Promotion of nazism and related ideologies, or at least preparation and publication of promotional materials of this nature on his dA account. This says all, pretty much.

These factors combined have convinced me that Luckmann's removal from the Vault is in its best interest. While other administrators contested my decision, ultimately it was upheld and Luckmann was again removed from the Vault's community following him persistently inserting various clues related to him being a nazi: defining his character as aryan, using an MLP avatar wearing a Third Reich peaked cap and similiar. All of this was done despite him being repeatedly asked to keep his political ideology off the Vault.

I fully support the decision of my fellow admin. While my reply is not as well worded as Luckmann's appeal, I ask you to understand the decision to keep a declared nazi and his claims that Alfred Rosenberg (head racial theorist of the NSDAP) is an example of non-hostile nazism as far away from the Vault as possible. Regards. http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/fallout/images/0/08/Personal_Sig_Image.gif Tagaziel (call!) 20:57, September 17, 2011 (UTC)
 * To clarify Tag's view towards Alfred Rosenberg to the rest of the community whom may not know of him, this was his view on the Polish people, and hence why one can presume that Tag included him: "no considerations can be taken for Poles, Czechs etc., who are as impotent as they are valueless and overbearing. They must be driven back to the east, so that the soil may become free to be tilled by the horny hands of Teutonic peasants". TheGuardianCalligraphy.pngGuardianoftheWastesTag.png

As a user who has researched in to this, I have to give my support to this ban. It is clear that all of the references he had made are just his way of pushing the limits. He is clearly someone who would kick a dog and complain when he was bitten. The kind of person I don't like. KusseldorfEggcup

Skål! 22:41, September 17, 2011 (UTC)


 * After having read all, I also fully support this ban. This guy is clearly an absolute racist who makes false personal intolerable conception of history (e.g. holocaust denier) and wants to push the limits of the rules all the time to annoy the community (particularly the admins) as possible with his racist opinions, that has nothing to do here. Itachou [~talk~] 14:39, September 18, 2011 (UTC)

I After seeing it all, I also support the ban. But why pernament? Maybe he realised he was doing wrong (or maybe he didn't, I don't know how much he was warned having racist content). Whatever the case is, let's hope he has abandoned his past life and focused to a much brighter (and less racist) future.


 * It is not a permanent ban, it is 1 year. A permanently ban is... well permanent. User avatar tag.gif Avatar talk.png 18:44, September 18, 2011 (UTC)

Having read the feedback, it seems to me that there are basically only a few points being made, which I will address below:
 * Luckmann's user page content should only be a problem if it offends a number of people.
 * RESPONSE: Racist content will not be allowed on this wiki, regardless of who is offended. Giving or taking offense is not the issue.


 * Luckmann's user page content (the pony avatar, "purebreed" and "master race" language) was meant as a joke or was not obviously racist content.
 * RESPONSE: Given Luckmann's history here and his self-professed beliefs, this content was clearly meant to refer to his racist views. What in other contexts may be seen as harmless or a joke, in Luckmann's case was neither.


 * Luckmann's year-long block was too harsh.
 * RESPONSE: The length of the block is in keeping with our suggested guidelines. It was preceded by warnings and other blocks. I hold that a year is an appropriate length.

And that's about it. I do not see any reason to reverse my block of Luckmann.--Gothemasticator 15:22, September 20, 2011 (UTC)


 * Pfff everything nowadays is racist. They changed ba ba black sheep to, ba ba rainbow sheep, cause apparently it racist. Just let him off the hook he did nothing wrong.M 16:13, September 21, 2011 (UTC)m


 * Jesus Christ. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 02:58, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

Why even bother to post on this forum if you're going to make a statement like that? I have the feeling that you didn't even go through the evidence against him if you're going to say that he did nothing wrong. I'm not entirely sure why people seem to believe that this man could never possibly be racist or controversial in any way. Skål! 03:04, September 22, 2011 (UTC)

If a user is racist, then he/she should keep it to his/herself. One's affiliation with any hostile or discriminating group should be greatly frowned upon and discouraged, and if a few hands have to be stepped on to keep it this way, then so be it. Let's say he is permitted an unban. Suddenly, other users with similar beliefs of beliefs just as extreme will rise as well, seeing the possibility of dodging consequences for their actions. Overall, a strong hand is required, and I applaud the strength that Gothemasticator has set out. However, by the logic of this basis, any discrimination of any kind should also be charged in the same degree. If you attack anons, this should be punished. If you attack fellow users, this should be punished. If you abuse powers, this should be punished. Goth did what was right, but his example should also be carried in other situations. Through usage of symbols we can portray meanings of hate and love, or any emotion for that matter. If someone posts a nazi sign, we shouldn't stand for that.If someone posts a sign Germany, however, of course this should be permitted. However, with symbols it doesn't truly matter what the symbol means, but rather how it is used. If the nazi emblem is used within the context of its origin, being from countless religions worldwide, why not allow it? However, for this issue alone, I stand beside Goth. However, I want the decision made today to follow into the future. Sombar1 02:10, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that Nazi references and complaints about the prevalent anon behaviour are worth comparison and should not be treated the same at all. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "a sign Germany", but FYI it is illegal to actually display Nazi imagery in Germany. --233345-cartman1_tiny.gif Avatar talk.png 17:31, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops. I meant to say a flag of Germany, I wrote the wrong thing. Anyway, I think the treatment of others in a hateful way of any kind should be dealt with. Obviously issues such as this should take a higher authority, but ultimately, discrimination is discrimination. It shouldn't matter who's discriminating or who they're discriminating against. Sombar1 17:51, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * First, let me make clear that in no way do I agree with any part of Nazism, and I mean no disrespect to Gothemasticator either, but what you're saying Sombar is that people should not be discriminated against due to whatever reason. However, isn't Luckmann's ban discriminatory against his beliefs? Not once had I ever seen him be racist, nor openly speak of his beliefs and yet he was still banned for them because he was a Nazi. That, in my eyes, is discrimination. Yes Man default.png 05:51, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * The Vault isn't a political discussion board, but I'd like to think of it as an inclusive community - if you're going to bring views that you know other people find upsetting and decisive then you have a responsibility to really keep it to yourself; not to continue to push where the line is. He wasn't thrown out immediately - he was asked to moderate his postings, he chose to continue to push the boundaries, in effect, he chose to be "exiled".  Agent c 02:28, September 27, 2011 (UTC)

I have to respectfully disagree. A man earns his title, and in this case, he has worked for this image. There are certain influences that should be snuffed out before they are allowed to poison others minds and affect every little thing around these beliefs. A man with a vision always gets his point across whether through subtle meanings or by manipulating those who are too weak-minded to see the threat that they, themselves, are currently facing. Want proof? The proof is in how the leadership here has had to show weakness by defending their points against a threat that shouldn't even be present on a wiki such as this one. Don't let political correctness rule over your common sense. Skål! 06:31, September 26, 2011 (UTC)