On 8/2/07, jayjg <jayjg99(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/1/07, John Lee <johnleemk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/2/07, jayjg <jayjg99(a)gmail.com>
Frankly, I don't really know what you're talking about any more,
Andrew. The people who look bad are those promoting this nonsense, and
those who insist on continually re-hashing it on Wikipedia and the
mailing list. Enough navel-gazing; go build an encyclopedia.
Those who also look bad are those trying to quell good faith
discussion/queries about SV.
"Good faith"? I don't think so. Wikien-l is not really supposed to be
a place for scurrilous gossip-mongering and conspiracy spreading, is
I'm really losing my patience with how you seem to misunderstand everything
we're saying, and it's getting harder to assume you're making good faith
misinterpretations, but I will try in spite of myself.
If you recall, we were talking about how people on-wiki were trying to
completely eradicate *questions* about the allegations - questions from
people acting in good faith. Believe it or not, not everyone on Wikipedia
knows who SV is or her storied past of abuse by WR, Brandt, et al, and there
is no reason to assume everyone asking about this is a bad faith
shit-stirrer trying to rile us/her up. That people were asking David Gerard
to oversight things like this, after removing the ostensibly offending
questions probably made in good faith, simply makes us look bad.