User talk:Robert McClenon/John Carter Archive

Regarding your dubiously founded statements

Allow me to say that I am frankly disgusted by your allegation that alleging incompetence is a personal attack, as I have stated on the dare I say rather self-righteous new subsection you have added to the NPOVN. Frankly, the misstatements you made there, and the rather dubiously founded conclusions you made based on them, and what might well be called your possibly irresponsible statements indicating what "you thought," apparently ignoring my own last statement there saying the discussion could be handled at the article talk page, raise questions which, under the circumstances, might not be to your own advantage. I believe saying someone has engaged in personal attacks when they have not done so is itself reasonably counted as a personal attack, and I expect an apology there. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 21:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Egotrips

Thank you for displaying in such an obvious fashion the depths of your own hypocrisy as per WP:HYPOCRISY. I find it ridiculous in the extreme that someone who rather self-righteously told me on my user talk page to maybe adhere to the Beatitudes has the transparent gall to turn around and make the kind of frankly obnoxious, unsupportable, pompous pontification as you have recently shown at the NPOVN, as well as the obvious lack of character you have shown by making transparently false allegations and, when told that they were false, and asked to apologize, as any reasonable person involved in a discussion would, arrogantly and rather again self-righteously said "the discussion is over."

You frankly give the impression of being one of our far less-than-productive "politeness police" who seem to take irrational joy in criticizing others while at the same time engaging in conduct which may well be far worse than that you criticize others for. This extends to your numerous summary judgments, such as ant the NPOVN, which is perhaps singularly obnoxious given that you yourself said that you didn't have time to look the situation over, but still had the stupid gall to make your ill-founded judgments anyway.

As I at least implied before, I contacted you on this because I believed it would be in your advantage to see cases of this kind, which basically deal with the "civil POV pusher," something many of the arbs past and present have said are among our worst problems. But I think they may have perhaps overlooked one of our other rather obvious problems. And that is the obvious problem of the know-it-all idiot who believes in his rather doubtfully founded high opinion of himself also has the inability to acknowledge his own obvious mistakes. You are apparently one of the best examples of that kind.

In the future, please, if you are going to declare that "you don't have the time to look something over," please at least show the basic character to refrain from making rather laughable preemptive judgments of the kind you have made here, and, from what I remember, in several other instances in the past. And, please, try to get over yourself. Thank you. John Carter (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)