chris at starglade.org wrote:
actionforum at comcast.net wrote: The signed the statement of Dispute and then notified me. They
shouldn't be
changing it underneath my responses. Yes, I could quote them,
because they might
delete from underneath me, but what is an RfC/user doing lacking
even the basic
integrity of a talk page. You were right the first time. It is
a blockable >>offense. But I wanted >you to know that some of the community seems to think >>nothing of this behavior.
-- Silverback
(could you turn on word wrap in your email client please).
It is a blockable offence to modify other users' statements, not your own. It is definitely dubious if people modify their original
statements
to make replies by another person sound out-of-place, but not
blockable.
I think you should quote the original version of the text you are replying to, adding it into your statement. I suggest you ask the
people
who are changing the text to stop, but I would caution against
accusing
them of trying to make your replies out-of-context (question the
action,
not the motive). This also assumes good faith, if you request
politely.
Chris
Er. Yes, that would assume good faith, wouldn't it. I like your advice, Chris, but it's been kind of mooted by Silverbacks recent editing on the wiki. He has been edit warring aggressively on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Silverback
to revert the changes (=minor corrections and updates) that he's talking about, accused User:172 repeatedly of vandalism for making them, posted {{test3}} vandalism warnings on the talk pages of 172 and User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters, and, believe it or not, posted a "severe vandalism" report about the issue on [[WP:VIP]], here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress&diff=25667676&oldid=25666928#RU_Se vere
Please see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/ Silverback
where he is still expressing outrage and condemnation, if you're interested. I had already recommended Silverback to write something like what you suggest in his own RfC statement--apart from considerations of courtesy it just seems a much *simpler* thing to do than all the reverts and threats and accusations--but I guess he doesn't want to.
I hope the wrapping doesn't break my links, or that they won't be really hard to fix if it does, sorry I'm not good at these things.
Bishonen