On 7/28/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
How do you get
that. The people doing the nyah nyah nyah thing, were
pointing at clear vandalism. I don't see how that is funny in a sense that
wikipedia itself is not a valid target of "wow, you let yourself be vandalised,
you dufuses!" jokes.
The bit that was funny was that it wasn't clear vandalism - it was
Eh? Almost believable in the sense that it is almost believable that
John Seigenthaler was directly involved in the murders of RFK and JFK.
I apologize if I don't share your sense of humour.
The fact that the opinions may have been such that numbskulls
who had never met smart neo-nazies in real life might ignorantly
ascribe them to hold, does not change the fact that there was no
difficulty in ascertaining that the edits were not legit edits by the
community in question.
There is a difference between demonising your opponent to such
a degree that you will believe anything about them (even that
the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were not a forgery, but that
that it was "almost believable" as a representation of Jewish
thought at large), and taking a cool look at the real circumstances
in the cold light of day, and checking to see if you are joking *at*
the people in question, or whether you are helping them justify
their alienation by demonstrating that you aren't going to address
them on a level playing field, for whatever reasons.
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]