Charles,
I agree that the GNAA are immature twerps, however they are significant enough to have survived VfD this many times. And they will survive again this time because MANY of us object to the amount of times that they're article have been on VfD and we think they are notable enough.
My question stands: just how many times are we doing to list the dratted page before we give up entirely? You speak of "disrupting Wikipedia to make a point" - how exactly is the listing on VfD 5 times by various users who are offended by the GNAA not violating this principle?!
Ta bu shi da yu
Charles Fulton wrote:
Well, as a member of the Peerage Cabal (or "Team Peerage") I'm hardly a deletionist, but I voted for its deletion. I do this because the behavior of the GNAA sickens me, particularly the manner in which they harrassed those who favored deletion the last time.
When I was a moderator at Slashdot (and I suppose I still accure mod points now and then), the GNAA comprised the sorts who thought it was the height of hilarity to make nonsense racist posts (e.g. YOU LOSE FAGGORT) or showcase their latest efforts at obscense ASCII art. They were notable only--ONLY--if you read at a 0 or -1 threshold. They are notable on Wikipedia only because of their repeated trollings, particularly on VfD. Is ass-hattery notable, in and of itself? If it is, then we should set up an article about Willy on Wheels, because he's been a far greater thorn in our side then the sainted members of the GNAA (don't take that wrong SPUI, I admire your contributions to railroading articles).
The GNAA is a passing, and adolescent, phenomena. They deserve mention in the Slashdot trolling phenomena article, which I believe still exists, but not in their own article. Don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, right? Do we reward them with their own article for a flagrant violation of policy? The situation is similar to Sollog, except that Sollog is the real deal. He has money and influence. He's been arrested by the Secret Service. If the GNAA could actually get themselves into real trouble, I might be impressed.
-Charles Fulton (aka Mackensen)
On Sun, 26 Dec 2004 12:26:47 +1100, csherlock@ljh.com.au csherlock@ljh.com.au wrote:
Guys, how many times are we going to list this before we stop this abuse of process? This is now the fifth time the article has been on votes for deletion and that sucks.
It seems to me that the deletionists won't stop till it's gone. I would like to propose that after this vote, we never allow it to be listed every again.
If we don't, then I'm considering putting [[Childlove movement]] back on VfD until I can gather enough support. Clearly if we're allowed to place GNAA on VfD unlimited times then it will be fine to put Childlove movement on there till we get rid of it.
Ta bu shi da yu
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l