User talk:Lakerdonald

lakerdonald is cool

hey man you're cool keep it up --Lakerdonald 15:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:U

Feel free to read over WP:U if you're bored, you should figure it out eventually. ;-) Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know what the word means, but it's not like his name was "semen" or something like that. I guess what you and I find offensive differ. Whatev --Lakerdonald 02:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question from my talk page

I was following the usual procedure, with warning templates that gradually got more stern. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 03:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

unblock

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lakerdonald (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Please define the personal attacks and trolling activities that you claim that I have been making? Is voting on the Brian Peppers AFD considered trolling now? Or is it because I'm a member of ED? I would love to have another admin review this "case", or at the very least, I would like a better reason as to why I have been blocked.

Decline reason:

Diff links illustrate the reason why. Valid decision, block stands. ¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Comment from blocking admin

The attacks mentioned by Cordesat on AN are this, this (also see edit summary), this. I don't see anything particularly strange about the third, but the first two are pretty clear-cut. See WP:AN for details. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also insulting Jimbo [1] was a seriously bad move. Game over, I think. Guy (Help!) 21:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Smegma was hardly an attack, I was just commenting. As to [2], I don't see how me restoring my userpage after it being cleared is an attack. And how is *disagreeing* with Jimmy Wales tantamount to insulting him? --{{SUBST:User:Lakerdonald/Sig}} 23:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]