User talk:Emnx

BEFORE you remove it again READ THE RULES. In the way you have implemented it I am entitled to remove it. UNTIL you implement it correctly (and I am certainly not going to tell you how) then I will continue to remove it.

Yes, EMNX is the account I have started using.

Yes I was editing under 81.157.73.83

Yes I started and account IP-81-157-73-83 to make a point about demeaning anon users but have closed it.

Sock Puppet: No.

To play Devil's Advocate I actually took OPPOSING views i.e. I added delete tags and saying the WHOLE article should be deleted! rather than argue to keep it together.

Hardly the actions of someone trying to bolster an argument but making identical arguments.

IPSOS has openly admitted that following vandalism of his user page he is using Mandrake Press as the battleground? Why?

You made no disclosure that you were editing as both User:Emnx and as the IP address. That's sockpuppetry to give the appearance of greater support for your position. I have not said that I am making a battle of this because of your vandalism to my user page. That is simply what attracted my attention to the article. I have provided arguments for my position which I believe to be the best solution to the problem of the two different companies being promoted under the title Mandrake Press. IPSOS (talk) 16:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert this page. If you don't know how to apply the procedure correctly that is your problem. However, in the circumstances, I AM ENTITLED TO REMOVE IT! You perhaps need to research your robotic application of guidance as immutable rules before you apply them incorrectly yet again.