I second Sascha's concerns. If you're an official representative of Wikipedia and are serving on a committee designed to make sure that people are following the policies, then it's not your place to pick and choose which policies you will enforce.
RickK
Sascha Noyes sascha@pantropy.net wrote: On Friday 23 January 2004 05:51 pm, Sean Barrett wrote:
If you think that personal attacks on other wikipedians are OK, then please advocate for the "no personal attacks" rule to get repealed.
I advocate the enforcement of the agreed-upon rules that are specified in [[Wikipedia:Policy]], which happens to include [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks]]. Your characterisation of the desire of wikipedians that personal attacks should halt as 'Mommy, he called me xxx" and "whinging" is both condescending and illogical, given that "no personal attacks" happens to be a wikipedia policy. I have quoted it before, and I shall quote it again (from [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks]]):
Sorry, no. I am not going to try to change the policy. Rather, when a case comes before the arbitration committee that consist of nothing more substantial than name-calling, I will recuse myself.
So what you're saying is that you don't want to enforce [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks]]. So who will enforce this rule? As I have stated before, we should either enforce our rules or stop paying lipservice to them and scrap them.
My characterization is "illogical"? Non-sequitur -- I'm not a Vulcan. "Condescending"? You're absolutely right. After all, my /six-year-old/ doesn't need my help to handle simple name-calling.
I question your suitability for the role of arbitrator based on your condescention towards those who want the wikipedia policies enforced.
Best, Sascha Noyes
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!