Oh gosh oh gee. Pleae assume good faith :-/ . I called you in when I actually thought there was a case. As to the comment, I deleted it, because it was somewhat out of line, and I wouldn't want to say that anyway. I did take that out, didn't I?
Even if not, "right honourable opponent" or "right honourable gentleman" is the way people often address the other party in the british house of commons, so no slight was intended (it was the part "have chosen to..." that was not very nice) Kim Bruning 11:01, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Even though I've been acting in good faith, I'd still like to apologise for leaving a bad impression. It was not intended. Kim Bruning 11:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Except that, being British, we can spell The Right Honourable William M. Connolley 11:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- OK! Fixed, fixed. Sorry :-) Kim Bruning 12:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting Kim. I'd have bought it a week ago when I was more naïve. Not dumb enough to buy your crap any more. You need to find a different audience to play to. Guettarda 18:28, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It saddens me that you feel this way. My apologies are sincere. In future, to prevent similar misunderstandings, I'd build up things like injunction requests in my own sandbox first, to prevent such misunderstandings (though I'd preferably not want to start arbitration cases at all, of course.) Kim Bruning 05:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Kim, I mistook you for a friend and I judged your actions in that context. My mistake isn't your fault. On the other hand, your actions posting the RFAr without informing anyone was underhanded. It would do you good not to do this regardless of whether you were dealing with a friend or an enemy.
- I find it incomprehensible that you should attack people in this manner, friend or foe, for trying to protect the integrity of articles. I assume that you are here because you have to best interests of the project at heart. I can't reconcile that with your actions, but I doubt you would still be here if you didn't. But, quite frankly, I'm no longer interested. I no longer see any reason to trust you. Guettarda 16:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- But but but... I was still writing the darn RFAr thing. I wanted to keep the scope limited so that it wasn't an attack too. I was still checking with people whether it was sane to do this thing too, your jumping at me forced my hand even :-( *sigh* Talk about backfire. Well, the damage is done. There's not much I can do to prove my sincerity, other than to continue to do my best in future. I'm terribly sorry you feel dissapointed. :-( Kim Bruning 16:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I have zero idea what's going on. How can I
make things worse help mediate this dispute? Let me know. Love, El_C 05:13, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]