" 

 ==Personal Attacks and Civility== 
 Regarding this edit: 
 Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.   Regarding  this edit: It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks!      

 :Personal attacks?  What about calling bullshit bullshit amounts to a personal attack?    
 ::Regarding your comments on my talk page: 
 ::# Please rephrase.  That sentance isn't readable.  If you meant to say what you did above my repsonse is this: it doesn't matter if you think a user ""believes that he is entitled"" to anything or that he ""fetishes process for everyone else.""  As the template so bluntly and accurately says, ""Comment on content, not on the contributor"".  You can attack his actions, but you are not allowed to attack him. 
 ::# Because you never reported the issue as far as I am aware. I take it on a user-by-user basis.  I don't have the time to go through the history of every user involved to make sure that all offenders are warned.  In any case, AMiB isn't the issue here, your comments are - unless you are trying to minimize your actions.  If you want to provide some diffs showing bad conduct on AMiB's part, I would be happy to look at them and warn him as appropriate. 
 ::# Last time I checked, templates were designed so that users wouldn't have to type up the same message over and over again.  If you prefer to give personalized messages, that's your choice, but generic messages are hardly insulting.  I personally will use templates unless it's inappropriate for the situation. 
 ::Lastly, please reply on your talk page for the sake of organization, so that this discussion doesn't get spread out over multiple pages.  I have your talk page on my watch list so I'll see when you respond.   

 :::# Your reply is rather amusing.  His actions are what I am commenting on - fetishising process and having a meltdown when someone challenges his authority are actions.  The rest is just semantic crap. 
 :::#""Because you never reported the issue as far as I am aware"" - that's a pretty weak justification for your actions.  I really couldn't care less, but for a new user (or one who feels embattled after being attacked by an admin) your actions would be a clear WP:BITE.  If you are coming in as an outside observer, you can't attack the actions of one side without taking the whole context into account.  You can't link to a conversation without reading it.  On the other hand, if you are here simply to attack me in support of your friend, feel free to troll. 
 :::# ""[T]emplates were designed so that users wouldn't have to type up the same message over and over again"".  Yep, they are designed for the lazy and unimaginitive (I use them all the time, I admit I am lazy and unimaginitive).  That being the case, it's still a calculated insult to use one on someone who isn't a new user (except for purely administrative actions, like a block).  So yes, you are free to insult people, but then don't expect it to be seen as anything other than a personal attack.  If you don't understand how to use templates, please refrain from using them.   "