Thread:Mfaizsyahmi/@comment-4369412-20130310195129/@comment-5370347-20130312005134

Benad361 wrote: Shomronon wrote: "and as Benad says, let me edit his articls, there shouldn't be any censoring just because it's deemed unflattering to some people" oh sure lets do it both way, let me edit his page with filth also! (nah i wont give him so much attention, but u get the point). Is it 'filth' to say that you made controversial remarks, and is it 'filth' to document things? No, you're just homogenizing to try to cover for yourself.

Because this is what the wiki is here for. To document. Not to censor anything that may reflect on someone badly, and to paint a perfect picture. If an unterganger is controversial, and has invoked much criticism, then why not mention it (in an unbiased way, of course)?

I've said my piece regarding this matter, so carry on. Anyone is free to edit any page on the wiki, apart from on pages that they may remove information from. Which has happened.

sure its filth, but i wont address it to an underage kid. kinda funny how the "benadic democrat (lol)" writes filth so easily without even asking the the guy he spreads filth on about his opinion. not that i care ofcourse, be as fasict as you like (ofcourse those untergangers i do care for already know all facts). i think it was kinda widespread also in stalin's time to make trials without asking the trialed guy for refutations.who could have thought benad learned so much from stalin...