Changes

I returned to editing in May 2008 after my block had been overturned.  There was no explanation of why or who was responsible (it was via a private message from another editor who had discussing this with the Arbitration committee).  People should perhaps ask themselves why this was - my assumption was that the whole matter was too embarrassing to discuss in public.  And that the whole thing could be swept under the carpet by inviting me back to edit quietly.  Apart from a rather unpleasant message that FT2 left on my talk page, no conditions were demanded.  With hindsight, it was a mistake to accept this arrangement.  Admins were left with the impression that severe conditions had been set on my activities, I was under the impression that FT2 was under some kind of secret censure or prohibition by the Arbitration Committee, or Wales.

I returned to editing in May 2008 after my block had been overturned.  There was no explanation of why or who was responsible (it was via a private message from another editor who had discussing this with the Arbitration committee).  People should perhaps ask themselves why this was - my assumption was that the whole matter was too embarrassing to discuss in public.  And that the whole thing could be swept under the carpet by inviting me back to edit quietly.  Apart from a rather unpleasant message that FT2 left on my talk page, no conditions were demanded.  With hindsight, it was a mistake to accept this arrangement.  Admins were left with the impression that severe conditions had been set on my activities, I was under the impression that FT2 was under some kind of secret censure or prohibition by the Arbitration Committee, or Wales.

At the end of June 2008 there was the first of the drive-by blocks.  I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20080630&target=Hinnibilis had been working] with a good editor (Phdarts) who had been restoring neutrality to the Pederasty page. I cover the whole aspect of pedophile editing in my article[http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:The_Wikipedia_Point_of_View/Wikipaedophilia Wikipaedophilia].  The salient points are as follows.  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Phdarts User Phdarts] contributed to Wikipedia from 19 May 2008 to 29 June 2008, making 380 edits in all.  His work, mostly on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty Pederasty] article was of consistently high standard: well written, well-sourced, and his comments on talk pages are both amusing and pertinent.  For example, he points out that 'Pederasty', as used in the modern paedophile liberation movement, is a neologism popularised by NAMBLA [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=213735837].  He wittily comments "I did find it rather odd that modern pederasty would be different from pederasty"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=214543247].  He rightly says that a pederasty article should not focus so much on times when slaves could not complain about pederasty, or when pedophiles could marry their 7 year old niece. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=214544104].  He cites recent research showing a clear association between pedophilia and child pornography.  "The production, possession, and distribution of child pornography are deeply interwoven in the activities of pedophiles, pederasts, and those involved in rings, sexual trafficking, child prostitution, and, more recently, the Internet" (Crosson-Tower 2007). Pederasts do not only break the law when they abuse children, they also break the law by creating and collecting child pornography. Thats a fact that requires inclusion in this pederasty article.  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=218608236]

At the end of June 2008 there was the first of the drive-by blocks.  I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20080630&target=Hinnibilis had been working] with a good editor (Phdarts) who had been restoring neutrality to the Pederasty page. I cover the whole aspect of pedophile editing in my article [http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:The_Wikipedia_Point_of_View/Wikipaedophilia Wikipaedophilia].  The salient points are as follows.  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Phdarts User Phdarts] contributed to Wikipedia from 19 May 2008 to 29 June 2008, making 380 edits in all.  His work, mostly on the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty Pederasty] article was of consistently high standard: well written, well-sourced, and his comments on talk pages are both amusing and pertinent.  For example, he points out that 'Pederasty', as used in the modern paedophile liberation movement, is a neologism popularised by NAMBLA [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=213735837].  He wittily comments "I did find it rather odd that modern pederasty would be different from pederasty"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=214543247].  He rightly says that a pederasty article should not focus so much on times when slaves could not complain about pederasty, or when pedophiles could marry their 7 year old niece. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=214544104].  He cites recent research showing a clear association between pedophilia and child pornography.  "The production, possession, and distribution of child pornography are deeply interwoven in the activities of pedophiles, pederasts, and those involved in rings, sexual trafficking, child prostitution, and, more recently, the Internet" (Crosson-Tower 2007). Pederasts do not only break the law when they abuse children, they also break the law by creating and collecting child pornography. Thats a fact that requires inclusion in this pederasty article.  [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pederasty&diff=prev&oldid=218608236]

The inclusion of such well-sourced material was fiercely resisted by a certain group of editors, one of whom complained "that matters have gone beyond personal intervention - however well-authenticated - ''and now demand third-party intervention (as before)''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Haiduc&diff=prev&oldid=222250643].  Phdarts was then [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3APhdarts blocked by fT2]

The inclusion of such well-sourced material was fiercely resisted by a certain group of editors, one of whom complained "that matters have gone beyond personal intervention - however well-authenticated - ''and now demand third-party intervention (as before)''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Haiduc&diff=prev&oldid=222250643].  Phdarts was then [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3APhdarts blocked by fT2]

I complained on FT2's talk page that "'''The effect''' is to support the efforts of paedophiles, isn't it? PHD is an exceptionally good editor and has a strong scientific knowledge of the subject. Why was he banned in the first place? Why this secrecy? (09:22, 29 June 2008).  I was blocked for saying this.

I complained on FT2's talk page that "'''The effect''' is to support the efforts of paedophiles, isn't it? PHD is an exceptionally good editor and has a strong scientific knowledge of the subject. Why was he banned in the first place? Why this secrecy? (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:FT2&oldid=222496698#WTF.3F.3F.3F.3F.3F.3F.3F 09:22, 29 June 2008)].  I was then blocked myself.

=== BLOCK NUMBER FOUR 13 August 2008 ===  

=== BLOCK NUMBER FOUR 13 August 2008 ===