On Fri, 5 May 2006 10:58:15 -0600, you wrote:
There is a bit of talking by one another here. Reasoned polite advocacy of policy positions is welcomed. Tendentious biased editing (especially when you are working in a group) is not. However, there are numerous situations where which is occurring is not immediately clear. Often the touchstone is that the nasty behavior goes on and on and on and on and on and at some point you realize you are engaging in deliberate behavior calculated to subvert neutral point of view (or in some other way create some tendency which simply doesn't belong in a reference work.
Yes, I suspect we are in violent agreement. It probably comes down to how one understands advocacy: I understand it as a point of view forcefully put, whereas on Wikipedia I rather prefer a case simply stated and consensus sought. But there is more than one shade of the colour advocado.
Guy (JzG)