User talk:Harveyfoale: Difference between revisions
imported>Sol Pacificus →Conduct on Discord: new section |
imported>Sol Pacificus |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Harveyfoale, there was no reason for you to accuse of me deleting your post for being "uncomfortable with the fact that [I] was wrong". If that were the case, I would not have deleted only your post, but Ken's as well. I have already explained the reasons why it was removed: because it was essentially a duplicate post and because messages about personal matters should be left at a user's talk page, not in the Discussions platform. This is to keep things streamlined and professional. Hence, your post violated two guidelines, and I was already lenient enough to allow Ken's to remain because it was clear for the sake of communication. As well, there is little shame to be mistaken about whose initial post about the "best fighter" was actually the duplicate, and I immediately acknowledged and apologized for it. Your accusation was very random, unprovoked, and uncalled for for what was no issue at all since we had hitherto been acting very friendly about it. I should also draw your attention to the Wikipedian principle of {{wiki|Wikipedia:Assume Good Faith|Assume Good Faith}} where you should always give the benefit of the doubt as to the best of intentions when there is no evidence of any wrongdoing or any malicious intent behind an action, and there was none. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 21:25, August 8, 2018 (UTC) | Harveyfoale, there was no reason for you to accuse of me deleting your post for being "uncomfortable with the fact that [I] was wrong". If that were the case, I would not have deleted only your post, but Ken's as well. I have already explained the reasons why it was removed: because it was essentially a duplicate post and because messages about personal matters should be left at a user's talk page, not in the Discussions platform. This is to keep things streamlined and professional. Hence, your post violated two guidelines, and I was already lenient enough to allow Ken's to remain because it was clear for the sake of communication. As well, there is little shame to be mistaken about whose initial post about the "best fighter" was actually the duplicate, and I immediately acknowledged and apologized for it. Your accusation was very random, unprovoked, and uncalled for for what was no issue at all since we had hitherto been acting very friendly about it. I should also draw your attention to the Wikipedian principle of {{wiki|Wikipedia:Assume Good Faith|Assume Good Faith}} where you should always give the benefit of the doubt as to the best of intentions when there is no evidence of any wrongdoing or any malicious intent behind an action, and there was none. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 21:25, August 8, 2018 (UTC) | ||
Actually, I just noticed that there was no mistake after all. I was in class at the time and was too much in a rush to look carefully, but Ken's post about "best fighter" was a duplicate of Fitz55's, having been posted on the same day but later which was the point. That your post in Fitz's thread came after Ken's duplicate post doesn't change the fact that Ken's was a duplicate of Fitz's post. | |||
One other matter I should point out is that reporting my comment apologizing for confusing which post was the duplicate (even though I now realize I was not mistaken) and thanking you and Ken is an abuse of the report function. If you did not appreciate that apology or the gratitude I expressed, that is no reason to report what is a nice comment. Please refrain from abusing the report button again. [[User:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#990000;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;font-size:17px">'''Sol Pacificus'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Sol Pacificus|<span style="color:#D4AF37;font-family:Californian FB;font-size:11px">(Cyfiero)</span>]]</sup> 21:37, August 8, 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:37, 8 August 2018
Conduct on Discord
Harveyfoale, there was no reason for you to accuse of me deleting your post for being "uncomfortable with the fact that [I] was wrong". If that were the case, I would not have deleted only your post, but Ken's as well. I have already explained the reasons why it was removed: because it was essentially a duplicate post and because messages about personal matters should be left at a user's talk page, not in the Discussions platform. This is to keep things streamlined and professional. Hence, your post violated two guidelines, and I was already lenient enough to allow Ken's to remain because it was clear for the sake of communication. As well, there is little shame to be mistaken about whose initial post about the "best fighter" was actually the duplicate, and I immediately acknowledged and apologized for it. Your accusation was very random, unprovoked, and uncalled for for what was no issue at all since we had hitherto been acting very friendly about it. I should also draw your attention to the Wikipedian principle of Assume Good Faith where you should always give the benefit of the doubt as to the best of intentions when there is no evidence of any wrongdoing or any malicious intent behind an action, and there was none. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 21:25, August 8, 2018 (UTC)
Actually, I just noticed that there was no mistake after all. I was in class at the time and was too much in a rush to look carefully, but Ken's post about "best fighter" was a duplicate of Fitz55's, having been posted on the same day but later which was the point. That your post in Fitz's thread came after Ken's duplicate post doesn't change the fact that Ken's was a duplicate of Fitz's post.
One other matter I should point out is that reporting my comment apologizing for confusing which post was the duplicate (even though I now realize I was not mistaken) and thanking you and Ken is an abuse of the report function. If you did not appreciate that apology or the gratitude I expressed, that is no reason to report what is a nice comment. Please refrain from abusing the report button again. Sol Pacificus(Cyfiero) 21:37, August 8, 2018 (UTC)