`  Joe Sewell has now made the following claims about why the request was rejected by the mediation committee. 1)That the request for mediation was a ``bum's rush.`` While I do not claim that I've exhausted every option, I did take many steps to resolve the dispute, including much activity on the talk page with little response from other editors. I accept the criticism that I did not exhaust every option. But I reject the emotionally loaded statement ``bum's rush.`` The tone of Joel's response is uncivil and inappropriate. It sounds like Joel also claims that 2) the request for mediation was rejected because of ``false information,`` that is was ``thrown out`` and ``deleted.`` Perhaps I'm confused by Joel's response. Does he mean other editors found the material in dispute to be false? Or is he saying that the committee concluded the information in dispute is false? If the later, Joel has seriously misread why the request for mediation was rejected. Certainly, if I am engaging in putting false information on wikipedia, then I should not be allowed to edit here. No one, besides Joel, has suggested this. I've quoted sources at length. I suspect Joel is very frustrated by the critical information about Calvary Chapel. I think the best response is not to angrily withdraw from the process, but to offer rewrites that reflect wider points of view, preferably with sources to back up the rewrites.  `