"The Cunctator" wrote
> My attitude is that people shouldn't get upset on someone else's
> behalf. It's fair to take umbrage if you're being insulted, but you
> don't need to jump into a discussion just to turn up the heat.
I think it is entirely fine to comment strongly on a lack of civility, as a third party. I believe that carries more weight.
I think that the comment under question has been read by some on this list as a declaration of open season on 'deletionists', with a unsubtle definition as those who read the WP policies on deletion as applying to WP.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
"The Cunctator" wrote
> Who is expressing hate for anyone?
You called someone a 'deletion nazi'? This should have been Game Over for your argument.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote
> Tough shit. The rest of us don't have to modify our behavior to satisfy the
> irrational and capricious preferences of a few uptight jackasses.
See about that.
> > Furthermore Godwin's Law applies: call someone a Nazi, you LOSE the
> > argument.
>
> What a wonderful example of your misundertanding of Godwin's law.
>
> Godwin's law is, essentially: "As the length of an argument on
> $ELECTRONICCOMMUNICATIONSMEDIUM continues, the probability of a comparison
> involving Nazi Germany approaches one."
>
> That's not the exact formulation, of course, but that's the gist of it.
> Nothing about "losing" the argument. Nor should there be.
>
> Why?
>
> Because there are times when comparisons with Nazi Germany are quite apt--such
> as in the case you're having a shitfit about.
Right. So it really wasn't a Seinfeld allusion at all. It was suggesting that enforcement of policy on website articles is actually donning jackboots.
The reason that Godwin's Law has such a corollary (with Gresham's Law as applied to threaded discussion, which I thought everyone takes as read) is that once the Nazi comparison is made, the rational case for anything goes straight out the window. Whose fault? Quite obvious.
> > I really don't think I'm the one who is maturity-challenged here.
> You're the one getting upset about stuff that doesn't matter...
Actually putting people in a pillory rather than explaining why you disagree with them matters a great deal. You are reading into my comments that "I'm upset". What I think, and am prepared to make an issue of, is the radical lack of civility being shown, to others rather than to me.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/UnNews:Hope_sucked_out_of_Wikipedia%2C_experts…
(I realised Esperanza had gone way off the rails when I got barnstar
police showing up at my talk page to inform me of the correct usage of
barnstars on my user page ... you know, those awards that were
strictly between the awarder and awardee in the days before an
overarching organization volunteered to help us soulless nerds with
such tricky matters.)
- d.
Kurt Maxwell Weber wrote
> On Wednesday 03 January 2007 16:20, charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com wrote:
> >
> > No, since when has attaching 'Nazi' to something been an acceptable way to
> > argue? Don't quote Seinfeld to me. I'm not American, I don't watch it. That
> > goes also for others on the list. You 'come on'. Stop being an ethnocentric
> > jerk.
>
> Oh, grow up.
>
> It was funny. And appropriate.
>
> If you're that thin-skinned that you find it upsetting, then you DESERVE to be
> upset.
Actually, it wasn't funny. It wasn't even a joke, as far as I can see. It wss intended to re-open the old deletionist-inclusionist schism. The Cunctator, having been a face of some eminence on enWP in the early days, pops up here again. Welcome back, I say; but please don't assume we're in the same timewarp as you. Matters such as reliable sourcing for articles are not now regarded as optional: we are more sensitive on the issue. Someone who posts here on the topic of unsourced articles about websites might expect a reasoned argument, in line with the current policies, rather than that.
Furthermore Godwin's Law applies: call someone a Nazi, you LOSE the argument.
And "If you're that thin-skinned that you find it upsetting, then you DESERVE to be upset" is not only crass, offensive stuff, if typical enough of the depths to which this list has sunk. (Can we please please moderate some of these folk? This is becoming troll city.) It seems to be aimed at everyone who might not understand the context.
I really don't think I'm the one who is maturity-challenged here.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Hi folks, apologies in advance if double-posting to here an [[WP:AN]] is
bad, but the following is an email sent by Sam Vaknin, an individual who has
had some problems with Wikipedia in the past, to members of some of his
mailing lists. The general gist is that he's asking his members to edit
[[List of further reading on narcissism and narcissistic personality
disorder]], [[Narcissism (psychology)]], and [[Narcissistic personality
disorder]]. Of course, some edits will be good, but I think the three
articles will see an increase in the number of edits in the next little
while, and hence, some higher scrutiny will be beneficial. I posted a
chopped-down version to [[WP:AN]], but the following is the full version,
minus the usual mailing list footers.
---
Dear members,
Many of you wrote to me to ask why there is no "Sam Vaknin" entry in the
Wikipedia (there is an entry for the late and great Tim Field and entries
for many other online personalities).
Once, there was a "Sam Vaknin" entry on the Wikipedia.
Anyone can edit Wikipedia entries, so my entry was hijacked by trolls and
flamers and consequently, it contained slander and libel.
I had to write many letters to James Wales and to the legal advisor of the
Wikipedia (including repeated threats of litigation) to get the entry
deleted.
Please do NOT initiate a new entry, as some of you suggested. I do NOT want
to be the subject an entry in the Wikipedia.
My deleted entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sam_Vaknin&action=edit
My views about the Wikipedia:
http://samvak.tripod.master.com/texis/master/search/?q=Wikipedia
BUT
There is something you can do.
The Wikipedia entries for Narcissism (Psychology) and Narcissistic
Personality Disorder are laughable and contain numerous inaccuracies, urban
legends and utter nonsense.
Some parts of the entries are borrowed verbatim from my work (without
attribution or credit, without my permission, and despite numerous protests
and notices of copyright infringement issued by my publisher). But about 60%
of the text require urgent revisions or outright deletion.
Anyone can edit the entries. All you have to do is click on the edit button
in the upper navigation bar of the article. You can change the text, add
external links, add references to literature, citations, and anything else
you deem relevant. I encourage to give it a try.
Click on these links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_further_reading_on_narcissism_and_narc…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_%28psychology%29http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder
Have a great year!
Sam Vaknin
James F. managed to pick the one pub in London that was closed for
repairs. So we stuck an oblique sign on the window (which may still be
there for all I know) and adjourned to the Chandos (?) near Leicester
Square.
Attendees: James Forrester, me, Phoebe (User:Brassratgirl), Austin
Hair, User:Psychonaut, User:Morwen, Chris McKenna (User:Thryduulf),
Chris Sherlock (User:Ta bu shi da yu) and his wife (they're doing
Europe for their honeymoon) and Psychonaut's pet ferret. We got lots
of photos on James' [[Casio Exilim]] EX-S600 camera, which I found the
"get usable photos in really dim light" setting on. I did my best to
be loud, drunk and embarrassing, except I am not susceptible to
embarrassment. We had a marvellous time. Excellent stuff.
Next week: what day depends on your schedule, Jimbo. Monday or Tuesday
evening, and where are you staying? Not sure which pub either. Chandos
has nice beer but was bloody impossible to find a seat in ... might
see if the Montagu Pyke is open this time.
- d.
"The Cunctator" wrote
> > No, since when has attaching 'Nazi' to something been an acceptable way to
> > argue?
> For a long time.
No, it's not acceptable just because you accept it.
Charles
-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information