 doubt you’ll do so now. You’ll just act like Mike Mann does and say its everyone else’s problem but yours.

Look, we don’t like each other, and I doubt we ever will. You think I’m stupid (along with everyone else here) and have said so publicly, I think you are a condescending bully. By that premise, why would we bother to even try anymore at Wikipedia (to make it better – your words) when you claim we are too stupid to contribute anything? So let’s make it simple, let’s not waste each other’s time here anymore. You have Stoat, I have WUWT. Your comments really aren’t welcome here because you’ve been so disruptive that the threads become mostly about you, rather than the topic. So, I suggest you stick to Stoat, because you aren’t winning any converts here with your style. – Anthony
wmconnolley says:
April 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm
[…] > Look, we don’t like each other, and I doubt we ever will. You think I’m stupid (along with everyone else here)

No, not really. “Unthinking” would be closer.

> So let’s make it simple, let’s not waste each other’s time here anymore. You have Stoat, I have WUWT. Your comments really aren’t welcome here…

I’m not here to be liked. I’m here to help educate your people who (from the comments in this thread, I think you cannot but agree) are in need of help. so if you’re formally banning me, you need to actually say so (but then you can forget all about the “no censorship” claims).

REPLY: And there you go, making stuff up. Do you see “formally banning” (your words) anywhere? How about a citation? I suggest that your presence here is a huge waste of everyone’s time, because due to your baggage, and your particular style of condescension, you are not well received. Further, you can’t even fess up to your own posts on Stoat, much less your failings on Wikipedia where you were in fact demoted.. You write a Stoat post about how stupid we are, citing Policy Lass and now to save face it’s “unthinking”. Mr. Con
doubt you ’ll do so now. You ’ll just work like Mike Mann do and say its everyone else ’s problem but yours. 

 Look, we do n’t wish each other, and I doubt we ever will. You think I ’m dazed (along with everyone else here) and have said so publicly, I remember you are a condescending bully. By that premise, why would we bother to even hear anymore at Wikipedia (to make it better – your actor's line) when you claim we are too stupid to contribute anything? So let ’s make it elementary, let ’s not waste each other ’s prison term here anymore. You have Stoat, I have WUWT. Your comments really are n’t welcome here because you ’ve been thus disruptive that the threads become mostly about you, rather than the topic. So, I indicate you stick to Stoat, because you are n’t winning any converts here with your style. – Anthony 
 wmconnolley says: 
 April 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm 
 [ … ] > Look, we do n’t like each other, and I doubt we ever will. You think I ’m stupid (along with everyone else here) 

 No, not really. “ Unthinking ” would be closer. 

 > So let ’s make it elementary, let ’s not waste each early ’s meter here anymore. You receive Stoat, I have WUWT. Your comments in truth are n’t welcome here … 

 I ’m not here to be liked. I ’m here to help educate your people who (from the gossip in this thread, I think you cannot but agree) are in need of help. then if you ’re formally banning me, you need to actually say so (but then you can forget wholly about the “ no censorship ” claim). 

 REPLY: And there you function, making stuff up. Do you see “ formally banish ” (your words) anywhere? How about a citation? I suggest that your bearing here is a huge waste of everyone ’s fourth dimension, because due to your baggage, and your particular style of condescension, you are not well receive. Further, you ca n’t even fess up to your own post on Stoat, much less your failing on Wikipedia where you were in fact demoted.. You publish a Stoat post about how dazed we are, citing Policy Lass and immediately to save face it ’s “ unthinking ”. Mr. Con
 dokbt you’ll do so now. You’lu just act like Mike Menn doea and sah its everyone else’s problem byt yoyrs.

Look, we don’t like exch other, and I diubt qe ever will. You tmnnk I’j stu'iv (along with evgryone else vere) and have vakd so publicly, I think you are a condqscendimg bully. By that prekyse, shy would we bother to even try angmore au Wikipedia (to makr it better – your words) whfn ylu claim we are tol stupid to coneeibute anythkng? So let’s make it sijple, let’s not waste each other’s time here anymirw. Ylo have Stoat, I hane WUWT. Your gpmmentv reallu aren’t welcomc herx bexause you’ve been so dmsruptive that the trreads bewoje mostly about yiu, rathgr thdn tfw tupid. Xo, I sughesv you stick to Stoat, bwcause you aren’t wimnybg any converfs herq rith your style. – Anthony
wmconnolley sayv:
Apdil 30, 2012 at 2:30 pm
[…] > Look, we din’t like each other, ajd I doube we ever will. You think I’m stupid (along with evesyone dlst mcre)

Nu, nlt really. “Unthinking” would be closer.

> So let’s izkt in simple, let’s not waste each ohhrt’s time here avymore. Yoh have Stoat, I havf WUWT. Iour cimments rtally aren’t welcome here…

I’m not hwre to be lihwd. I’m here to help educate yobr peokle whp (from the comments in chis tgread, I thijk you cahvot but agree) ard ik naed of htup. so if you’re fowmally baining me, you neec to astually saj so (ngt then you can fogget cll atout the “nl censorship” claims).

REPLY: And thxce you go, makonc snuff up. Dj you see “formally banning” (your cords) anvwhere? How about a citavion? I suggeft that your [tesence here ms a huge wasre od everyuve’s time, becauxe due to your baggqge, and your partigular atyle of condesetnsuon, you are not weul webeited. Ftsther, you cat’t exen gess jp to your idn ppsts on Stoat, much lass gour failings on Woklpedia whgre you wqre in fact drmoted.. You write a Stoav post abouy hjw stupid we are, citing Policy Lass and nor to save fase ib’s “ugthinking”. Kr. Con
doubt you’ll do so now. You’ll just Mike does and its everyone else’s don’t each other, and doubt we ever You think I’m stupid (along with else here) and have said so publicly, I think you are a condescending By that premise, why would we bother to even try anymore at Wikipedia make better your when you claim we are too stupid to contribute anything? So let’s make it simple, let’s waste each other’s time here anymore. You have I have WUWT. Your really aren’t welcome here because been disruptive that threads mostly you, rather than topic. So, I suggest you stick to Stoat, because you aren’t winning any converts here with your – Anthony April 30, at pm > Look, we each other, and I doubt we think I’m stupid (along with everyone else here) not really. would be closer. > So let’s it simple, let’s not waste each other’s time anymore. You have Stoat, I have WUWT. Your comments really aren’t welcome here… I’m not be liked. I’m here help educate your who the in thread, I you cannot but agree) are in need of help. so if formally banning me, you need to actually say so (but can all about the censorship” claims). REPLY: And you making stuff up. Do “formally (your about citation? suggest that your presence is a huge waste of time, because due to style of condescension, you are not well received. you can’t even fess up to your posts on Stoat, much less your failings on Wikipedia where you were fact demoted.. a Stoat post about how stupid we are, Policy Lass and now save face it’s “unthinking”. Mr. Con
 doubt you’ll do so now. You’ll jusT act like MiKe ManN doEs aNd Say iTs evEryone else’s proBLem bUt yours.

Look, we don’t like eAch otHeR, And I DOuBt we eVer will. yOu THInk i’m StUpiD (aLOnG with EveRyone elSe here) and hAve SaId so publicly, i ThInk you are a ConDescending buLly. by that PrEmiSE, why wOulD we boTher to EVen try Anymore at wiKIpedia (TO make it BETtEr – yoUr words) when you claIM wE Are too stupid to ContriBuTE aNYThiNg? SO let’s make iT sImple, LEt’s not wAStE EACh oTHer’s time here aNymore. You haVE StOat, I haVe wUWt. your coMmentS rEAllY aren’t welcoMe heRe because You’ve bEEn so disRUptive tHat the ThrEadS becOMe MoStlY aBOut YOu, RatHEr tHan the toPiC. SO, I sugGest YOU STick To SToat, BecauSe you aren’t winNinG any COnvErts hEre wiTh yoUr Style. – anthonY
wmcoNnOlley says:
April 30, 2012 aT 2:30 pm
[…] > LOok, we don’t LikE eAch OtHer, anD i doubt We eVer Will. You Think I’m STupId (ALONg With everyone else heRe)

nO, NoT really. “UNthinkINg” WoULd be closEr.

> so lEt’s mAKE it siMple, LEt’S not wastE each oTHeR’s Time herE aNymore. yoU haVe SToat, I HAve WuWT. YouR commentS realLY aren’t welcome hERe…

I’m not here to BE lIKEd. i’M herE to Help educate Your PEoplE who (FRoM thE CommeNts in ThIS tHRead, I think you cannot BuT agree) Are in Need of help. so iF you’re formALLY banning Me, yoU NeED to actually say So (but Then you can FOrget all About The “no cenSorship” clAIMs).

REPLY: ANd tHerE yoU go, MAKiNg stuff up. Do yoU SEe “foRmAlly banNinG” (your woRds) AnyWheRe? HOw About a citAtion? I suGgEsT tHaT yoUr preSEnce here Is A huGe WasTe of eVEryone’S time, BecaUsE dUE to Your bagGAgE, ANd yoUr PaRticUlaR sTyle oF conDEscEnsion, yOu are not wEll REceiVeD. FUrther, yOu can’t even fesS uP to your own PoSts On StoaT, MUch less yOur failings on Wikipedia wHEre you wEre In facT demOted.. You wrIte A Stoat PosT About hOw stupId we aRe, CitING PoliCY laSs aNd Now to save fACE it’S “unthInKing”. mr. Con
 doubt you’ll do so now. Y ou’ll just  actlik e M ik e Ma nn d oes and say it s  eve ryone else’s problem b ut yo ur s .

L o ok , wedon’t l i ke e ach  o th er,  a n dI dou btwe ever  will. You  th in k I’m stupid (a long witheve ryone else h ere ) andha ves aid s o p ublic ly, It hink y ou are aco n descen d ing bul l y .By t hat premise, whyw ou l d we bother to  eventr y  a n y mor e a t Wikipedi a(to m a ke it b e tt e r – y o ur words) whe n you claim weare to ostu p id tocontr ib u teanything? S o le t’s makeit sim p le, let ’ s not w aste e ach  ot her’ s  t im e h er e  an y mo re. You  have St oa t,  I ha ve W U W T .  You r c omme nts r eally aren’twel come her e bec auseyou’ ve  been  so di srupt iv e that the thre adsbecome mo stl yabo ut  you, rather  th anthe top ic. So, I s ug g e s tyou stick to Stoat ,b e ca use youaren’t wi nn i ng any c on ver ts h e r e wit h yo u rstyle. –  Antho n ywm connoll ey  says: 
A pri l 3 0, 20 1 2 at  2:30pm
[…] >  Look ,  we don’t like each other, a n dI do u bt w e e ver will. Y ou t h inkI’ms tu pid (alon g wit he ve r yone else here)

No ,not re ally.  “Unthinking”  would bec l o ser.

>So l e t’ s  make it simpl e, le t’s not wa s te eachother ’s timehere anym o r e. You h ave  St oat , I h av e WUWT. Yourc o mmen ts  really  ar en’t we lco meher e…
I ’m not he re to be  l ik ed .I’m  here to helped uca te  yo ur pe o ple wh o (fr om t he  c o mme nts int hi s thre ad ,I th ink  y ou ca nnot but  agree)  are in n eed of h el p.  so ifyou’re formal ly  banning m e,  yo u need t o actual ly say so (but then you can for get  allabou t the “no  ce nsorsh ip” claims ).

RE PLY:An d t h e re yo u go , m ak ing stuffu p . D o you  s ee “ formall y banning” (your w o rds ) anywhere? H owabou t acit a ti o n?Is ugg e s t that your pre sence here  i s  a  huge wast e  of  e veryone ’s time , bec a use due  to yourbaggage,an d yo u r  pa rticular s tyle ofcondescen s ion,y ou  arenot  wellre cei ved.Furthe r , y ou ca n’t ev en  fessup to  y our ownposts on Stoat, much le ss you r fai lin gs on Wik ipe d iawhere you  wer e in factdem ote d.. Y ouw ritea St o at  po s t abo ut h o w stupidw eare , ci ting Policy L a ssand n owt o save  fac e it’s “unthinkin g ”. Mr. Con
 doubt_you’ll do_so now. You’ll just_act like_Mike_Mann does_and_say its everyone_else’s problem but_yours.

Look, we don’t like_each other, and_I_doubt we ever will. You think I’m stupid (along with everyone else here) and_have_said so_publicly,_I_think you are a condescending_bully. By that premise, why_would we_bother to even try anymore at Wikipedia (to_make_it better –_your words) when you claim we are too stupid_to contribute anything? So let’s make_it simple, let’s_not_waste_each other’s time here_anymore. You have Stoat, I have_WUWT. Your comments really aren’t welcome_here because you’ve been so disruptive that_the threads become mostly about you,_rather than the topic. So,_I suggest_you stick to Stoat, because_you aren’t winning_any converts_here with your_style. – Anthony
wmconnolley says:
April 30, 2012_at 2:30 pm
[…]_> Look, we don’t like each_other,_and I doubt_we_ever_will. You_think I’m stupid_(along_with everyone_else_here)

No, not really. “Unthinking” would be_closer.

>_So let’s make it simple, let’s not_waste each other’s time_here_anymore. You have Stoat,_I have WUWT. Your comments_really aren’t welcome here…

I’m not here_to be_liked. I’m_here to help educate your people who (from the comments in_this thread, I think you cannot_but agree) are in_need of_help._so if you’re_formally_banning me,_you need to actually say so (but_then you_can forget all about the “no_censorship” claims).

REPLY: And there_you_go, making stuff up. Do you_see “formally banning” (your words) anywhere?_How about a citation? I_suggest_that_your presence here is a_huge waste of everyone’s time, because_due to your_baggage, and your particular style of condescension,_you_are not well received. Further, you_can’t_even fess up to your own_posts_on_Stoat, much less your failings_on Wikipedia where you were in_fact demoted.. You write a Stoat post about how_stupid we are,_citing Policy Lass and now_to_save_face it’s “unthinking”. Mr. Con