Garrrr! It not roid rage! It justifiable barbellcide! Garrr!!!
I even spelled out in the talk page that I wasn't being vituperative. But did anyone read back more than two layers of comments? Hard to tell.
What goes a long way is actually doing what is right, but clearly some people insist on manipulating the process to get their way while others are blocked from acting within their rights.
The passive-aggressive nature of the conflicts I've observed on Wikipedia is flat-out dysfunctional. This one has been no different. I try to be direct so people will act appropriately. Instead they get offended by the truth and accuse me of antisocial behavior. And other people buy into it. Madness among epistemologists must lead to a loss of information. Bad mojo.
...wait a sec...
The blocks are all gone. I can get edit pages now. Thanks, Jim. You are a musclehead and a gentleman.
--Blair
Jim Cecropia wrote:
Blair, I removed the autoblocks as well. You should be able to edit now.
I strongly suggest you brush up Wittiquette. I know how frustrating it can be to see what you view (and may be) unfair or inaccurate material in an article. Yet the (sometims almost goofy) courtesies of Wikipedia, surprisingly, go a very long way. Argue on substance, not personalities or characterizations.
Remmeber that cardinal Wikirule "No 'Roid Rage" ;-)
--C
Thanks, Jim.
I don't see my named account as blocked in the block list, but there are two numbered accounts autoblocked (probably because of the NAT serving the multiple computers on my IP) still listed there, which may be why I still can't edit a page yet.
How long does an unblock take to work?
--Blair
Jim Cecropia wrote:
I have unblocked Blair P. Houghton so that he can defend himself in the appropriate forums on Wikipedia.
The 3RR blocking is being extremely abused, IMO. We sometimes give actual anon vandals who trash articles more slack than some logged-in users that have an honest difference of opinion. I am an amateur body builder for 20 years. I am no expert but, like many who enjoy the sport, I've studied a good bit about it. Either the prior version or Houghton's version are accurate, and I believe Houghton's is a bit better written and more reflects the state-of-the-art.
HOWEVER, I am not taking a position on which version should stand, just indicating that I know Houghton's version is, at least, not vandalism.
The 3RR, as I've stated elsewhere, is a loose cannon which tends to favor the status-quo. If the there is a content dispute, the better solution is to protect the article for a limited time to get the combatants to hash out the issue in article talk. In the instant case, I notice that GeorgeStepanek, for example, numbered his reverts ("first, second, third") which telegraphs consciousness of the 3RR as a trap, then another editor who disagrees with Houghton picked up on the reverting.
The 3RR page says that you will not necessarily be blocked for 3RR, it is admin's discretion. CryptoDerk used his discretion to block; I ordinarily will not get in the way of another admin's judgment, but in this case I've used my discretion to unblock.
I caution Blair P. Houghton to take his arguments about the article to its talk page for now, and to argue about his being blocked in other forums.
I also must state that, as Houghton infers, neither truth nor accuracy is determined by consensus, and that is NOT a comment specifically on the Weight Training article.
-Cecropia
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l