" 

 == From Talk:Taiwan == 

 Someone closed the discussion at Talk:Taiwan, rightly so I suppose since it had little to do with Taiwan, but I think the discussion was not over so I've copied part of it here.    
 ::I can stop now, and will, so long as the silliness from Midcent stops. But please note that the silliness is not just here. He (or some other anonymous editor - I obviously cannot be sure due to the absence of sigs) chose to post a mass of garbage on . So, who is being provocative? I will say that I know that what I'm doing is provocative, and quite deliberate at times. I don't believe in niceness for the sake of it when absolute (but terribly nice) bullshit is being posted. That usually achieves nothing. The problem with Midcent (or those other? anonymous editors) is that he is an incompetent editor. He doesn't understand normal Wikipedia practices, ignores advice, and thus disrupts in ignorance. It's the ignoring advice bit that probably irks me the most.    
 :::Midcent is not signing - but unfortunately he seems to be right that there is no rule saying he has to.  Midcent does make arguments that I disagree with, but even if you are correct that his arguments are silly or moronic, Wikipedia doesn't have rules against silly moronic arguments either.  I find him annoying, but as far as I can tell his actions are in bounds based on Wikipedia rules. But HiLo48, your actions are not.  Quoting WP:CIVIL, ""Incivility consists of one of more of the following behaviors: personal attacks, rudeness, disrespectful comments, and aggressive behaviours-when such behavior disrupts the project and leads to unproductive stressors and conflict. Editors make mistakes, so a few minor incidents of incivility are not in themselves a major concern. However, an unfolding pattern of incivility is disruptive and unacceptable. If incivility becomes harassment or egregious personal attacks, then it may result in blocks.""  Calling a person ""fool"", ""moron"", and ""idiot"" is clearly a personal attack.  I don't think I need to detail other ways you've been incivil.  I will, however, violate one of the civility rules and tell you to grow up!   Dealing with annoying people is part of life and overreacting just gets you into trouble.  In real life when someone says you're stupid you can ignore them - making that person look stupid - or you can punch the person out and get dragged away by the police - making yourself look stupid. Let me quote WP:CIVIL again: ""In general, be understanding and non-retaliatory in dealing with incivility. If others are uncivil, be understanding (people do say things when they get upset) rather than judgmental, and do not respond in kind. If necessary, point out gently that you think the comment might be considered uncivil, and make it clear that you want to move on and focus on the content issue.""   Now you and I and Berlinsquare have pointed out to Midcent that we think his behavior is annoying. I've pointed out to you that I think you're behavior is uncivil.  Let's all try to move on. ""Only take things to dispute resolution (see below) if there is an ongoing problem you can't resolve.""  I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. One more point, Berlinsquare hints that Midcent may be baiting (""(a) taunting or baiting: deliberately pushing others to the point of breaching civility even if not seeming to commit such a breach themselves. "").  He may be right, but still, ""All editors are responsible for their own behavior in cases of baiting; a user who is baited is not excused by that if they attack in response"".   
 ::::With all due respect, I call that post pointless bullshit. It's as if you haven't read my post immediately above at all.  
 I read your post before I wrote my response.  I wrote the response because you wrote, ""I can stop now, and will, so long as the silliness from Midcent stops"".  The point is, as I notice Buster Seven is also trying to explain to you, you have to remain civil even when the other guy doesn't.  If you remain civil, and Midcent continues to be annoying, then perhaps you can lead a civil discussion of how we can deal with his behavior.  But so long as you continue to overreact it is your behavior, not his, that will be the focus negative attention.   "