| Revision as of 07:22, 11 September 2014 editAndreJustAndre (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users40,961 edits →Re: "agency": new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:23, 11 September 2014 edit undoAndreJustAndre (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users40,961 edits user is apparently editing and these warnings discourage communication here which is anti-wikiNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{semiretired|date=June 1, 2014}} | |||
| {{Long Wikibreak|]| when I feel recharged enough to resume editing.}} | |||
| == Archives == | == Archives == | ||
Revision as of 07:23, 11 September 2014
Archives
Workpages
(Please don't leave messages)
Re: "agency"
Informal mediation is just that - informal. It breaks the rules and only offers constructive advice and information. Nobody has to agree to my participation -- anyone may make a constructive comment on a talk page. You'll note that my comment offered the likelihood that Ret. Prof was reading too much into the gospel-written-in-Hebrew story based on Casey's actual words, and then based on that he apparently conceded this relatively significant contextual point and simply wishes to use an earlier chronology - a completely different thing? There is no agency or advocacy relationship, informal or no, but I would like a "successful" mediation to stay resolved. It's true that Ret. Prof asked for my help, but the other participants also asked for my help in the original mediation. More to the point though I think your tone is combative, and your stance has been unhelpful for some time. If Ret. Prof has essentially conceded the point, the mediation is over. Andrevan@ 07:22, 11 September 2014 (UTC)