How are you hurt if you don't come out and admit you don't edit Wikipedia much, if at all? We won't hurt you. We're just curious. We aren't judging your proposals based on who they're coming from, but if they sound ridiculous, then the way we look at them does depend on who you are. If it was, say, any known active Wikipedian, then we'd know for sure that something has to be corrected. But musings from someone who is not active on Wikipedia are likely to be way off.
From your postings, I think we've already established you aren't an active editor - that's okay with me. But you should know that trying to cover this up will only hurt your reputation instead of enhancing it.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])
NSK wrote:
On Wednesday 27 October 2004 03:24, Delirium wrote:
it's natural that your ideas will be treated more skeptically than those of someone who is demostrably familiar with the community
Hi,
I think it would be a good idea if people could examine ideas and decide on their usefulness without considering who proposed these ideas.
Consider for example that it is possible that a well-known community member may say something wrong and a newcomer can say something useful.
So, although some people may be somewhat sceptical seeing a non-familiar name in their To: headers, they should examine the ideas and not the poster; or at least this is my opinion.