My second Corbett Report comment has been approved by the moderator (because I included more than 3 links) and can now be read.

I didn't know if d3rr wanted to be interviewed so I threw it in brackets, in part because, if I recall correctly (I hope I'm not confusing you with someone else), you are an integral part of SaidIt as coder and co-host. Correct?

Whether I'm listening to music or a podcast, watching a movie, documentary, or YouTube I usually multitask and see what the interwebs has to say. I've contributed to WP since 2007 but I was never deep much less knew all the "culture" behind it, until in May 2016, because there was no Corbett Report article I drafted one.

My James Corbett draft was rejected multiple times after revisions before finally being deleted with prejudice in later 2016. To be fair, it started poorly, but I just assumed I and everyone would improve it. Then I learned about "reliable" sources vs "fringe" sources like RT and InfoWars and TED etc. And researching for my draft I discovered there was a previous "The Corbett Report" article deleted in 2015, and I kindly got someone with privileges to temporarily resurrect it so I could fold it into my article. It was okay but only a stub.

I'd also been butting heads against the guard dogs of various articles. I didn't know they were guard dogs at the time and I learned about proper citations, and "reliable" sources and all their rigged rules and coded speak.

I didn't want to change the 9/11 article. I didn't want to change the 9/11 conspiracy article (yet). I just wanted to correct a lot of bullshit on the 9/11 Truth Movement article.

Over time they won and by August I stopped trying to "fix" the inaccuracies and misinformation. I got learned. Sorta.

I kept pushing the envelope. I created article stubs for a couple "fringe" documentaries, one on how fast food is poison essentially, and another on the UK health system being hollowed out. With these and my last Corbett article submission as well as dredging up my past learning curve of mistakes they claimed they had adequate excuse to ban me from Wikipedia for a year for being "another polite truther". Many of these bent admins seem to relish their judgement process and condemnation. Several called for outright banning me without expiration.

Because I made a lot of edits on Wikipedia this year I got a notice saying the annual end-of-year trials (my word) was happening and I could weigh in over 2 or 3 weeks. If it hasn't already it will end soon. I feel guilty that I didn't go and save at least one person but the system is utterly rigged and you need to know all their codes and then you need to know all of their history because the comb it for every infraction as if you intended malicious harm. I don't have a Wikipedian black belt. I'd love to form a truther team but they forbid organizing groups on pain of expulsion in or outside of Wikipedia for their gang's monopoly (on violence). Though it'd be kind a kewl if thousands of truther folks either mustered legit reliable sources to actually improve the 9/11 conspiracy and truther movement articles (leave the "official" story alone because it accurately reports the crap the officials say) or ceremonially die on the banishment swords of Wikipedia.

Also, is there anything I missed or that you'd like me to post on The Corbett Report comment forum? Now or in the future, let me know.

Also, also, I'd be interested to know if Corbett reaches out to you, for curiosity's sake as well as to know if my posts fall on deaf ears or not.