User talk:Balloonman/Brendon

Ok, several of us are having a very hard time with user:Brendon111. I can't believe that this is a new user and not somebody socking at the Mohamed Images RfC. From his very first edit, Brendon showed a high level of wiki-edit knowledge [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Brendon111&oldid=482870118]. His account was opened on March 20th, the same date that Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Muhammad images started. Brendon makes perhaps 50 edits, mostly to his own pages, before he stumbles upon the RfC[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Muhammad_images&diff=prev&oldid=484502206] on March 29th. Virtually every edit from that point forward was to the RfC where he's shown a higher level of knowledge (and annoyance) to many people. Since then virtually every edit over the past month revolves around this RfC:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Brendon111&dir=prev&offset=20120330065410&target=Brendon111 virtually every edit in this group of 100 relates to the RfC.]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Brendon111&dir=prev&offset=20120408085708&target=Brendon111 virtually every edit in this group of 100 relates to the RfC].

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Brendon111&dir=prev&offset=20120414004849&target=Brendon111 all but about 10 edits deal with the RfC.]

Most of his most recent [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Brendon111&dir=prev&offset=20120417204814&target=Brendon111 100 edits] are relative to his starting a Wiki-assistance request because User talk:Griswaldo accused him of being a veteran user who created a sock account to disrupt the RfC.

That view is held by others:

but I do think that it would be more constructive for Brendon11 to also focus more on the relevant issues than the commentators. I also understand that rhetoric may not be the best way to argue things, even if they do not amount to commenting on commentators―much of the time, it is better to use "boring language" rather than "strong language," but at the same time, use "strong arguments user:New questions? 07:40, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
I have no comment on Brendon's posts, I tuned him out as a bit of an extremist awhile ago Tarc (talk) 00:28, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
A perfunctory glance at a sampling of the comments you have left throughout the RfC in all their dizzying array of shades and sizes paints a striking picture without the superfluous need of an image. Namely, fanaticism comes in many shapes and colours. Veritycheck (talk) 23:51, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
but the observation I made on your own rhetoric has always remained valid - you cannot seem to comment on other people's "sensitivities" without using some form of perjorative language like "fragile sentiments" above. Matt Lewis (talk) 21:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
you have brought nothing new to this discussion, but you have added such a wall of text that you are effectively stimying pertinent discussion. Anthonyhcole (talk) 07:21, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

A sample of Brendon's comments during the RfC:

“Muslim-sympathizers”

“Islamic mumbo-jumbo”

“Over-sensitive lunatics”

“Islamic hyper-sensitivity”

“Its penchant for gratuitous communal violence”

{{hat|There are at least 16 cases where Brendon has gone to a user's talk page and asked them to chime in on a specific aspect of the RfC. In all 16 cases, he includes, comments such as I really need your feedback. or 'I really need your feedback...I hope you get the point behind the it or I invite to look at this. I liked your comments here by the way''}}

We (new questions and I) need you there[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Belorn&diff=prev&oldid=487891124 Belorn]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Belorn&diff=prev&oldid=487891124 Belorn again]
I really need your feedback
I really need your feedback...I hope you get the point behind the it
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nigelj&diff=prev&oldid=487574159 I invite to look at this. I liked your comments here by the way]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Scottywong&diff=prev&oldid=487258964 ScottyWong]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Scottywong&diff=prev&oldid=485471709 ScottyWong again]]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JohnChrysostom&diff=prev&oldid=487258110 JohnChrysostom]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JohnChrysostom&diff=prev&oldid=485471447 JohnCrysostom again]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alanscottwalker&diff=prev&oldid=487259202 Alanscott]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alanscottwalker&diff=prev&oldid=485471269 AlanScott Walker Again]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johnbod&diff=prev&oldid=487259553 Johnbold]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johnbod&diff=prev&oldid=485471373 Johnbod again]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mitch_Ames&diff=prev&oldid=487260076 Mitch Ames]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ravenswing&diff=prev&oldid=487260497 Ravenswing]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Beyond_My_Ken&diff=prev&oldid=487261205 Beyond My Ken]