Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/AlexCovarrubias2

Note

I must make a note that AlexCovarrubias (talk · contribs) does not adress any of the evidence or the substance of the RfC/U but rather spends his comment section on arguing that the RfC/U is based on malevolence by the filing parties. It would really be becoming to instead adress the substance of the argument, and the evidence of past conduct.·Maunus·ƛ· 22:49, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Maunus

• to Googolplexforce: You seem to have the case backwards. This is not a case about a single event or dispute between two individuals, but a case where there is extensive documentation of a particular pattern of behavior by one user. Confronted with polite requests to modify the behavior the editor has responded by accusing me of harassment instead. I don't need to respond to Alex accusations of harassment here - I have already answered that in his thread at ANI - the alleged harassment seeems to be solely that I have expressed that I don't find his behavior acceptable without first being invited to do so. I am not required to respond to accusations here - if Alex can find aother user who thinks I harass editors then he is free to open an rfc aobout my conduct - but that is not the situation here. This RfC is however about the behavior that is evedenced in the diffs - have you looked at the diffs?·Maunus·ƛ· 00:47, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Note re. my comments

I would ask that if anyone has a question/comment/concern about what I have said in this RFC/U, that they would notify me of it on my talkpage since I am no longer very active here on Wikipedia. Thanks --Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 18:07, 26 February 2011 (UTC)