`  :this is stupid. i defent the actions of  in Talk:Digg and then  threatens to ban me. i then post in Talk:Digg that the cost of defending  is banning and then  and  threaten to ban me, too.  also reverts my changes. so i harass them back. was there a more proper warning i should have made against ? probably, but i don't know what it is.  :but then  goes crying to , saying that i harassed her, and  makes good on his unjustified threat.  needs to read WP:AGF. she says my conduct ``has been pretty uncivil in general``. WP:AGF!!! i don't see how i was ever uncivil. the one example  provides is bogus. that was intended as a joke and if you can't take it as a joke, that's your problem. it certainly isn't worthy of a ban.  :i'd post this on your talk page, , but because of the ban, i can only post on mine. so i hope you read my talk page and apologize. apologize and make  and  do the same. either that or you should step down because you are clearly a disgrace to wikipedia.  :oh, sry. my saying you're a disgrace to wikipedia violates WP:CIVIL, doesn't it? maybe you should have thought of that before you violated WP:CIVIL, yourself, and threatened to ban me. and perhaps  and  should have thought of that, too. you can't expect civility when the people you're engaging in friendly debate with try to subvert your arguments by banning you or deleting them, all together. that i've been civil up to know is pretty amazing and i should be commended for it - not banned for it.`