Jesus, what a baby pretending to be the victim. Admins only step in when you've been breaking rules such as by edit warring—which means refusing to discuss chan

Jesus, what a baby pretending to be the victim. Admins only step in when you've been breaking rules such as by edit warring—which means refusing to discuss changes and just redoing edits to get your way—or by constantly using personal attacks, which surprise: the message he quotes accuses him of. This guy has a lot of trouble understanding that when you enter someone's house, you have to follow their rules. "The encyclopedia anyone can edit" doesn't mean "the encyclopedia anyone can add indiscriminately to", it's still an encyclopedia. It's really funny how he accuses others of having an agenda when he's literally being paid to edit on the behalf of others. As for the case with them tracking editors, it does sound pretty malicious on the surface. However, any edits made without an account are tied to IP addresses, which would easily explain that and is prominently noted when you try editing while logged out. About the Casino employee, the only reason they would be emailing his workplace would be because his edits are against policy. (also only editing access is revoked, never reading) The locations of logged in users can only accessed be accessed by admins when it is strongly suspected you are using multiple accounts, so, again, kid crying when he's the perpetrator. Of course the information about trusting Wikipedia bears repeating as with all user-editable sources. [0] I get that its cool to hate Wikipedia these days, which is why this is on the front page, but please remember that this is a resource that all of you use daily and yet you all get by fine with it. Yes many of its articles suck; yes it has problems with systematic bias, paid editing, and other issues; but most of the "controversies" you'll hear about are from disgruntled people who never took the time to understand the community and then just run to the media to play the victim. (And I daresay: their "fixing" of bias is actually an attempt to introduce it) The only way Wikipedia can be made better is by the efforts of its volunteers–that's you—so if you see something wrong, be bold [1] and bring it up and I promise most users will take it in good faith. [2] [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith