Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

155

Thankfully, is no buerocrat on German Metapedia, just a plain Administrator.

Westwall is very hostile and just blocked me from Metapedia again.

Disclaimer: Westwall usually makes good contributions on the Wiki, but how he treats fellow contributers is utterly unacceptable!

Before explaining what happened, first:

My (common) opinion about the phrase _“because I said so”_.

I despise the kind of person that considers “because I said so” a legitimate argument. “Because I said so” is such a highly obnoxious phrase. It helps nobody, it is not even a logical argument, no constructive criticism; it's just blank excision of power.

In fact, I tend to instantly despise people who say “because I said so” (if not meant as a joke). No exaggeration. The phrase “because I said so” instantly tells me a lot about one's personality.

Every school teacher in my life who commonly used the obnoxious phrase “because I said so” had a lot of other despicable personal traits and belonged to the hated school teachers among my class mates, which is no co-incidence.

This is not just my opinion, but many people I know personally share this opinion.

What happened

(Rough translations)

  • Westwall me to “stop with nonsense” (creating a category on lists of websites excluded from the Wayback Machine).
  • I what exactly about that category he considers nonsense, and explained that some readers might be legitimately interested in it.
  • His : “BECAUSE I SAID SO”.
    • I already despised Westwall, but this obviously re-inforced it. Yet I stayed civil all the way to the end.
    • His reply also stated: “You have no clue about our structure of categories.”
  • My constructive : Then I suggest creating a page to explain that structure, so I can constructively learn from it. Also, I would like to know what one more administrator has to say about it.
  • His reply (does not even address my reply): **“I don't think I wasn't clear enough. But because you repeatedly neglected administrator's instructions afterwards are too long to translate (I don't quite feel like it right now), but you can use Google Translate for it.

I suspect that Westwall, who personally despises me, just started this discussion so he can find an excuse to get me out.

I hope that the more civil administrators Thore and Hyperboreer can sort it out.

Thankfully, [Westwall](https://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Westwall) is no buerocrat on German Metapedia, just a plain Administrator. Westwall is very hostile and just blocked me from Metapedia again. Disclaimer: Westwall usually makes good contributions on the Wiki, but how he treats fellow contributers is **utterly unacceptable!** Before explaining what happened, first: # **My (common) opinion about the phrase _“because I said so”_.** **I despise** the kind of person that considers “because I said so” a legitimate argument. **“Because I said so” is such a highly obnoxious phrase.** It helps nobody, it is not even a logical argument, no constructive criticism; it's just blank excision of power. In fact, I tend to **instantly** despise people who say ***“because I said so”*** (if not meant as a joke). **No exaggeration.** The phrase *“because I said so”* **instantly** tells me a lot about one's personality. Every school teacher in my life who commonly used the obnoxious phrase ***“because I said so”*** had a lot of other despicable personal traits and belonged to the hated school teachers among my class mates, which is no co-incidence. This is not just my opinion, but **many people** I know personally share this opinion. ## What happened (Rough translations) * Westwall [advised](https://de.metapedia.org/m/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Anon9&diff=1238383&oldid=1236921) me to “stop with [this](https://de.metapedia.org/wiki/Kategorie:Auf_Sperrliste_der_Wayback_Machine) nonsense” (creating a category on lists of websites excluded from the Wayback Machine). * I [asked](https://de.metapedia.org/m/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Anon9&diff=1238390&oldid=1238383) what exactly about that category he considers nonsense, and explained that some readers might be legitimately interested in it. * His [reply](https://de.metapedia.org/m/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Anon9&diff=1238413&oldid=1238390): **“BECAUSE I SAID SO”**. * I already despised Westwall, but this obviously re-inforced it. Yet I stayed civil all the way to the end. * His reply also stated: “You have no clue about our structure of categories.” * My constructive [reply](https://de.metapedia.org/m/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:Anon9&diff=1238476&oldid=1238413): Then I suggest creating a page to **explain** that structure, so **I can constructively learn from it.** Also, I would like to know what **one more** administrator has to say about it. * His reply (does not even address my reply): **“I don't think I wasn't clear enough. But because **you repeatedly neglected administrator's instructions** [debunked in next reply], I am blocking you for four weeks to think about your behaviour and your general *nastinesses*. Have a nice weekend [sarcasm, obviously] and good free days.” [I got blocked for four weeks.] My [replies](https://de.metapedia.org/m/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion%3AAnon9&type=revision&diff=1238540&oldid=1238534) afterwards are too long to translate (I don't quite feel like it right now), but you can use Google Translate for it. I suspect that Westwall, who personally despises me, just started this discussion so he can find an excuse to get me out. I hope that the more civil administrators *Thore* and *Hyperboreer* can sort it out.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (11).
[–] • 1 pt

I forgot to mention examples where it is obvious that one is doing something wrong.

Has he an obligation to negotiate anything with you, to begin with?

He can either negotiate or leave me alone.

But I have violated zero policies of the site, and made hundreds of positive contributions within days.

Pretty much anything else I would say is actually already mentioned in 's .

Westwall does not own the site. Administrator on MediaWiki is a misnomer. They should have called it moderator.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

Only things you can rely on to make your case, is what the rule book regarding moderation ("the Law") says... And what "past jurisprudence" in similar cases are, if any available...

Of course you mustn't have infringed upon any rules to begin with, that goes without saying

The rest is irrelevant (how really (or supposedly) positive your past contributions have been for instance, that's subjective also, btw)

Do you have a link to the rules/"rule book" moderators must abide to?

[–] • 2 pts

The link is (German).

Feel free to use Google Translate.

Their Administrators (functionally moderators) are volunteers, as far as I know, and not a part of the site staff.

[–] • 1 pt

Their Administrators (functionally moderators) are volunteers, as far as I know, and not a part of the site staff.

Correct.

[–] • 1 pt

If every administrator was like Westwall, a project is doomed to fail.

[–] • 0 pt

https://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Metapedia:Content_guidelines

Examples of Topics Suitable for Metapedia

>Ideology and philosophy.

>Pro-European people, parties, movements, literature, events, web pages etc.

>Historical events relevant to the pro-European struggle. For example the Reconquista, the French Revolution, World War 2, non-European invasions of European territory (Ottoman, Moorish and Hunnish invasions).

>Mass media: Foreign control, anti-white bias, left wing orientation. Articles outlining the owner structure and obvious anti-European bias of the mainstream media.

>Alternative music. Synthwave, neofolk, ambient, dark wave, folk metal, black metal, nationalist rock and other genres with pro-European tendencies.

>Traditionalism, ariosophy, European and Indo-European traditions etc.

>Religion. In particular the indigenous European religions, but also other religions.

>Physical anthropology and genetics. IQ-studies, eugenics, racial differences and such.

>Personal improvement. Articles on topics and books related to personal improvement.

...

Where does "creating a category on lists of websites excluded from the Wayback Machine" fits here?

I fail to see, personally, so that doesn't really plead in your favor, to begin with

[–] • 2 pts

I just took a look at the , which is much longer.

Apparently, that Wayback exclusion category is neutral according to those rules. It certainly doesn't breach any rules.

[–] • 1 pt

Indeed. It is neutral!

Westwall, although a productive editor, is a hostile butthole. I can't stand him.

He harms Metapedia through his utter hostility.