From: David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au
JAY JG (jayjg@hotmail.com) [050521 02:34]:
As you well know, the history of organized school inclusionism long precedes this particular and very recent set of school VfDs, and even stooped to the level of sockpuppet voting.
So you don't mean of late, your evidence of robotic voting closely resembles the editing pattern of several of us you're arguing this point with, and you mean the one (it was one) person running a pile of sockpuppets you will now see absent.
It is a long-standing issue that continues to fester, though I appreciate your efforts in getting rid of that pile of sockpuppets.
So if Tony or I can be classed as "schools inclusionists", does that mean we're doing robotic voting with insinuations of sockpuppetry, are these other people you fingered as robo-voters even though the complained-of voting pattern resembles ours running sockpuppets, or what do you mean? Your stated concern is not staying constant in the course of the discussion.
The stated concern is still robotic "keep" voting by some editors who don't even bother to read the articles concerned, organized by school inclusionists (via "schoolwatch" pages). I stand by that interpretation of events, even though neither you nor Tony agree that the evidence I have given proves it.
You are notably failing to acknowledge that placing fifty schools at once on VFD could possibly be a provocative act that could arouse great attention, really upset people and in fact cause people to get involved, as Tony documents in detail. Do you see that it could be taken that way?
Yes, I acknowledge that it could upset people and be seen as a provocative act. I do note that Neutrality's reasons for VfD nomination were not identical in every case, and often referred to specific issues with the articles themselves, unlike many of the votes made in response. And I also note again that organized school inclusionism started long before this very recent incident.
That said, I'm wary of letting the list bog down in interminable debates, as it so often does, and in any event I don't particularly enjoy being so publically at odds with people that I respect. Perhaps you can respond with a summation/last word, and then we can take this to private e-mail.
Jay.