, 25 January 2013 (UTC) 
 ::::::::First, as I already pointed out, it is clear you already know that my position is that these are suspected socks rather than confirmed socks. I made this clear when I originally brought your attention to the matter last summer (after you cited them as evidence of a consensus that didn’t exist to justify your attempts at purging “MLM” from the article). I stated at that time that these accounts were “looking an awful lot like sock puppets”. I have since made my position even more clear by saying explicitly several times that these are suspected socks. The characteristics of those 3 accounts strongly suggest that they are socks. If you would like to comprehensively address your past user conduct issues in railroading through tendentious edits on the basis of SPA accounts that fit the profile of sock puppets, then I’m game. Since you are unrepentant and still trying to railroad through the same changes, admin scrutiny and intervention would probably be a good idea. In which venue would you like me to report you?  

 ::::::::While we’re on the subject of admin intervention for user conduct, can you not recognize your own hypocrisy in complaining about alleged “personal attacks”, which in reality consisted nothing more than expressing concern that 3 SPAs might be sock puppets, and then in the same breath making a clear personal attack against my manhood. You are leaping into an abyss of user conduct issues here.   17:34