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.