Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
False. I said it was trolling, not that you are a troll. Continuing to post an inflammatory interpretation that has been contradicted by someone who has more knowledge of the situation than you have, is trolling.
Because "I know more about this, so trust me." has worked so well in the past. You've said, 'No, you're wrong!' and seem to be thinking that that is enough argument/contradiction to make him feel everything is ok, then. It doesn't and *shouldn't* work that way.
Guy, the attitude you're pushing here is *exactly* what has ticked off Alec, and had myself (in the RFC) and Bryan (on the list) ruminating that WP:V should apply to every part of Wikipedia decision making.
I mean, I'm no stranger to harassment (tiny harassment); did any of you see/remember the crap that spewed out from my RfA at the start of the month? And yeah, it heppened because I'm a *girl*, in an attempt to rattle me as a member of the fairer sex or something. And I genuinely believe that handling it ON WIKI, where everyone can see what was done, and why it was done, and that it's not acceptable, and the official response, etc., is the best thing in the world. If solutions and responses are taken off wiki so all we see is, 'He was deleted for harassment, everything he's done was oversighted, trust us.' then I have a serious problem with that, and this list, which you're trying to make sound like a little support group to discuss harassment and it's effects on Wikipedia, seems to have the wherewithal to do that, and based on the one obvious case that's happened, does indeed seem to do it. That's very disturbing to me.
Thes.