`:A certain admin will block you if you tell the truth about a certain user's dirty tricks. But she won't do anything to the user who pulled the dirty tricks. She only ``punishes`` the victim of the dirty tricks. The perpetrator goes scot free. That's ``Wikipedia justice``, as practiced by admin pschemp.    :Apparently she wants no one to know that Ryulong deleted my request for help on Khoikhoi's talk page, falsely describing my request for help as ``vandalism`` in his edit summary. Oops! Was it ``uncivil`` again, for me to tell the truth? If so, then prosecutors in court will never be able to tell the truth about crimes, because it would be an ``uncivil`` ``personal attack`` to use words such as ``lie``, ``dishonest``, ``vandal``, ``thief``, ``murderer``, ``rapist``, etc. The judge would get too upset by such ``uncivil comments``. Come to think of it, every time an admin describes a user's action as ``vandalism``, or a user as a ``vandal``, that's an improper ``personal attack``, according to pschemp's logic. If pschemp treats people equally (not likely), then she better block all the admins who make those ``personal attacks`` of describing a particular user's behavior as ``vandalism``. And she better block Ryulong for using that ``personal attack`` against me in his false edit summaries.    `