Jules writes:
I looked at the last comments that RK said he removed from his talk page. Although the one from E of T was a bit inflammatory, it seemed to be a response to one of Roberts own "attacks" -- I infer a typically one-sided and less than tactful comment he made about someone else's work. If my inference or characterization are incorrect, I apologise.
Jules, I really wish you had made an effort to ascertain the truth; as it turns out, your idea is totally off base. In point of fact, I was writing comments about creationism, evolution, speciation, genetics and cooperating with others on classifying our Gaia theory articles. These are science issues.
I ask you: What kind of people see such mundane science discussions as appropriate for denunciations of my perceived views on the Israeki-Palestinian issue?
What kind of obsessed person thinks the appropriate response to a discussion on genetics is something like "But you Zionists should stop oppressing Palestinians".
Am I mistaken here? Is evolution now "anti-Arab"? Is Gaia theory now pro-Zionist? Come off it. Let's talk about speciation and transitional fossils, as I was doing on Wikipedia. Wait! Doesn't this call for remarks about the Palestinians?
No.
At least, not to someone who doesn't have a grudge against a Wikipedia contributor, because he is Jewish.
No matter what topic I write about, certain people simply ignore the topic, and drag the Zionists (i.e. the Jews) into this. They are not trying to produce encyclopedia quality work; they are out to score points, hurt people, and make themselves feel "liberal".
The comment made by Pizza Puzzle may have been
*personally* offensive to
Robert, but it is simply a statement of PP's own opinion
on the
situation. I may not be popular, but he is entitled to
it.
No, he is not entitled to keep harassing me on my own personal User page about his political views, especially when I am trying to work with others on some science articles.
Presumably user talk pages are meant to be places where
we communicate with
each other in public -- so I don't see why there is a
problem.
So if you are white, then white-haters can taunt you repeatedly on your User page, and you won't have a problem with it?
Zoe is gone due to similar harassment. A few of my other Jewish friends visited (teachers, PhD.s, etc.)...and left quickly, sensing a bit too much self-righteous left-wing animosity towards Jews. (And those same Jews were themselves rather left wing.) They think I am nuts for staying here.
If RK doesn't like a comment, he can erase it -- as he
did -- but
it's a pain in the arse to have to look it up in the
history.
No, I can't! You totally missed the point. When I tried to erase the comment, I was slandered as an Arabophobe.
That, by the way, is untrue. I happen to have lived for two years with a Muslim Arab from Morocco, and had Muslim Palestinian friends in graduate school, and I also happen to support Israeli political parties that are to the left of the current government. I also have particiapted on numerous occasions with interfaith Muslim-Jewish prayer groups, and my synagogue is considered somewhat progressive for precisely this sort of thing.
I am, however, opposed to what the U.S. State Department condemns as Palestinian terrorism...and this last fact alone has caused me to be repeatedly slandered as a bigot, as a racist, etc. And no one on Wikipedia objects to these false characterizations of me. But what this has to do with speciation, creationism and evolution, I'll never know!
It seems pretty clear to me that many people on Wikipedia do not care if one is pro-tolerance and pro-Arab or not. Facts don't matter one whit to one whose conclusions are based only in prejudice. All that many Wikipedians care about is constant proving how evil the Zionist (read: "Jewish") position is, even if they haven't the slightest fucking idea what I actually do or believe.
But my disagreement is less that RK is phobic of Arabs,
but instead
is overly sensitive, perhaps even paranoid, about
anything that isn't
vehemently pro-Israeli/pro-Zionist.
Sorry, Jules, but I disagree. GENETICS AND SPECIATION ARE NOT PRO-ZIONIST. Sorry for shouting, please look at the topics I was working on, and compare them to the comments. Do you see any relation? Of course not; there isn't one. People are lashing out at me simply because I am a Jew. That is not paranoia. It is, however, unacceptable.
I thus ask you to reconsider your comments.
Robert (RK)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Robert,
You are correct. However misguided and offensive your "science" perspective is; it has nothing to do with your being Jewish or having whatever opinions you may have on Zionism, etc. However you got trapped into having to defend yourself is irrelevant.
They are picking on you and should stop. Anti-Semitism is indeed unacceptable behaviour whatever excuse may be found for it.
I do wish you had picked someone besides Jules to straighten out though. She's just about had it too.
Fred
From: Robert rkscience100@yahoo.com Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:21:11 -0700 (PDT) To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Unacceptable behaviour
Jules writes:
I looked at the last comments that RK said he removed from his talk page. Although the one from E of T was a bit inflammatory, it seemed to be a response to one of Roberts own "attacks" -- I infer a typically one-sided and less than tactful comment he made about someone else's work. If my inference or characterization are incorrect, I apologise.
Jules, I really wish you had made an effort to ascertain the truth; as it turns out, your idea is totally off base. In point of fact, I was writing comments about creationism, evolution, speciation, genetics and cooperating with others on classifying our Gaia theory articles. These are science issues.
I ask you: What kind of people see such mundane science discussions as appropriate for denunciations of my perceived views on the Israeki-Palestinian issue?
What kind of obsessed person thinks the appropriate response to a discussion on genetics is something like "But you Zionists should stop oppressing Palestinians".
Am I mistaken here? Is evolution now "anti-Arab"? Is Gaia theory now pro-Zionist? Come off it. Let's talk about speciation and transitional fossils, as I was doing on Wikipedia. Wait! Doesn't this call for remarks about the Palestinians?
No.
At least, not to someone who doesn't have a grudge against a Wikipedia contributor, because he is Jewish.
No matter what topic I write about, certain people simply ignore the topic, and drag the Zionists (i.e. the Jews) into this. They are not trying to produce encyclopedia quality work; they are out to score points, hurt people, and make themselves feel "liberal".
The comment made by Pizza Puzzle may have been
*personally* offensive to
Robert, but it is simply a statement of PP's own opinion
on the
situation. I may not be popular, but he is entitled to
it.
No, he is not entitled to keep harassing me on my own personal User page about his political views, especially when I am trying to work with others on some science articles.
Presumably user talk pages are meant to be places where
we communicate with
each other in public -- so I don't see why there is a
problem.
So if you are white, then white-haters can taunt you repeatedly on your User page, and you won't have a problem with it?
Zoe is gone due to similar harassment. A few of my other Jewish friends visited (teachers, PhD.s, etc.)...and left quickly, sensing a bit too much self-righteous left-wing animosity towards Jews. (And those same Jews were themselves rather left wing.) They think I am nuts for staying here.
If RK doesn't like a comment, he can erase it -- as he
did -- but
it's a pain in the arse to have to look it up in the
history.
No, I can't! You totally missed the point. When I tried to erase the comment, I was slandered as an Arabophobe.
That, by the way, is untrue. I happen to have lived for two years with a Muslim Arab from Morocco, and had Muslim Palestinian friends in graduate school, and I also happen to support Israeli political parties that are to the left of the current government. I also have particiapted on numerous occasions with interfaith Muslim-Jewish prayer groups, and my synagogue is considered somewhat progressive for precisely this sort of thing.
I am, however, opposed to what the U.S. State Department condemns as Palestinian terrorism...and this last fact alone has caused me to be repeatedly slandered as a bigot, as a racist, etc. And no one on Wikipedia objects to these false characterizations of me. But what this has to do with speciation, creationism and evolution, I'll never know!
It seems pretty clear to me that many people on Wikipedia do not care if one is pro-tolerance and pro-Arab or not. Facts don't matter one whit to one whose conclusions are based only in prejudice. All that many Wikipedians care about is constant proving how evil the Zionist (read: "Jewish") position is, even if they haven't the slightest fucking idea what I actually do or believe.
But my disagreement is less that RK is phobic of Arabs,
but instead
is overly sensitive, perhaps even paranoid, about
anything that isn't
vehemently pro-Israeli/pro-Zionist.
Sorry, Jules, but I disagree. GENETICS AND SPECIATION ARE NOT PRO-ZIONIST. Sorry for shouting, please look at the topics I was working on, and compare them to the comments. Do you see any relation? Of course not; there isn't one. People are lashing out at me simply because I am a Jew. That is not paranoia. It is, however, unacceptable.
I thus ask you to reconsider your comments.
Robert (RK)
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Im uncertain what Fred's point is here -- is he feeding/petting a troll, or criticizing Jules for acting out of upstanding reason and putting her foot down on Bob's "victim me" sort of behaviour? I dont want unnecesarily ruffle feathers here -- it wont do any good -- I'm just pointing out that the one with the most puffy, ornately ruffled feathers doesnt deserve by default the upper hand. Catering to certain people to make certian people they feel good about themselves is unquestionably irrelevant to the problem of people slandering others for what we loosely call "racism."
-S-
Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote: Robert,
You are correct. However misguided and offensive your "science" perspective is; it has nothing to do with your being Jewish or having whatever opinions you may have on Zionism, etc. However you got trapped into having to defend yourself is irrelevant.
They are picking on you and should stop. Anti-Semitism is indeed unacceptable behaviour whatever excuse may be found for it.
I do wish you had picked someone besides Jules to straighten out though. She's just about had it too.
Fred
From: Robert Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 18:21:11 -0700 (PDT) To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Unacceptable behaviour
Jules writes:
I looked at the last comments that RK said he removed from his talk page. Although the one from E of T was a bit inflammatory, it seemed to be a response to one of Roberts own "attacks" -- I infer a typically one-sided and less than tactful comment he made about someone else's work. If my inference or characterization are incorrect, I apologise.
Jules, I really wish you had made an effort to ascertain the truth; as it turns out, your idea is totally off base. In point of fact, I was writing comments about creationism, evolution, speciation, genetics and cooperating with others on classifying our Gaia theory articles. These are science issues.
I ask you: What kind of people see such mundane science discussions as appropriate for denunciations of my perceived views on the Israeki-Palestinian issue?
What kind of obsessed person thinks the appropriate response to a discussion on genetics is something like "But you Zionists should stop oppressing Palestinians".
Am I mistaken here? Is evolution now "anti-Arab"? Is Gaia theory now pro-Zionist? Come off it. Let's talk about speciation and transitional fossils, as I was doing on Wikipedia. Wait! Doesn't this call for remarks about the Palestinians?
No.
At least, not to someone who doesn't have a grudge against a Wikipedia contributor, because he is Jewish.
No matter what topic I write about, certain people simply ignore the topic, and drag the Zionists (i.e. the Jews) into this. They are not trying to produce encyclopedia quality work; they are out to score points, hurt people, and make themselves feel "liberal".
The comment made by Pizza Puzzle may have been
*personally* offensive to
Robert, but it is simply a statement of PP's own opinion
on the
situation. I may not be popular, but he is entitled to
it.
No, he is not entitled to keep harassing me on my own personal User page about his political views, especially when I am trying to work with others on some science articles.
Presumably user talk pages are meant to be places where
we communicate with
each other in public -- so I don't see why there is a
problem.
So if you are white, then white-haters can taunt you repeatedly on your User page, and you won't have a problem with it?
Zoe is gone due to similar harassment. A few of my other Jewish friends visited (teachers, PhD.s, etc.)...and left quickly, sensing a bit too much self-righteous left-wing animosity towards Jews. (And those same Jews were themselves rather left wing.) They think I am nuts for staying here.
If RK doesn't like a comment, he can erase it -- as he
did -- but
it's a pain in the arse to have to look it up in the
history.
No, I can't! You totally missed the point. When I tried to erase the comment, I was slandered as an Arabophobe.
That, by the way, is untrue. I happen to have lived for two years with a Muslim Arab from Morocco, and had Muslim Palestinian friends in graduate school, and I also happen to support Israeli political parties that are to the left of the current government. I also have particiapted on numerous occasions with interfaith Muslim-Jewish prayer groups, and my synagogue is considered somewhat progressive for precisely this sort of thing.
I am, however, opposed to what the U.S. State Department condemns as Palestinian terrorism...and this last fact alone has caused me to be repeatedly slandered as a bigot, as a racist, etc. And no one on Wikipedia objects to these false characterizations of me. But what this has to do with speciation, creationism and evolution, I'll never know!
It seems pretty clear to me that many people on Wikipedia do not care if one is pro-tolerance and pro-Arab or not. Facts don't matter one whit to one whose conclusions are based only in prejudice. All that many Wikipedians care about is constant proving how evil the Zionist (read: "Jewish") position is, even if they haven't the slightest fucking idea what I actually do or believe.
But my disagreement is less that RK is phobic of Arabs,
but instead
is overly sensitive, perhaps even paranoid, about
anything that isn't
vehemently pro-Israeli/pro-Zionist.
Sorry, Jules, but I disagree. GENETICS AND SPECIATION ARE NOT PRO-ZIONIST. Sorry for shouting, please look at the topics I was working on, and compare them to the comments. Do you see any relation? Of course not; there isn't one. People are lashing out at me simply because I am a Jew. That is not paranoia. It is, however, unacceptable.
I thus ask you to reconsider your comments.
Robert (RK)
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
Robert, if you can't be nice, take your marbles to the other side of the playground.
By the way: It is completely acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them. It's called freedom of speech.
--- Robert rkscience100@yahoo.com wrote:
Jules writes:
I looked at the last comments that RK said he removed from his talk page. Although the one from E of T was a bit inflammatory, it seemed to be a response to one of Roberts own "attacks" -- I infer a typically one-sided and less than tactful comment he made about someone else's work. If my inference or characterization are incorrect, I apologise.
Jules, I really wish you had made an effort to ascertain the truth; as it turns out, your idea is totally off base. In point of fact, I was writing comments about creationism, evolution, speciation, genetics and cooperating with others on classifying our Gaia theory articles. These are science issues.
I ask you: What kind of people see such mundane science discussions as appropriate for denunciations of my perceived views on the Israeki-Palestinian issue?
What kind of obsessed person thinks the appropriate response to a discussion on genetics is something like "But you Zionists should stop oppressing Palestinians".
Am I mistaken here? Is evolution now "anti-Arab"? Is Gaia theory now pro-Zionist? Come off it. Let's talk about speciation and transitional fossils, as I was doing on Wikipedia. Wait! Doesn't this call for remarks about the Palestinians?
No.
At least, not to someone who doesn't have a grudge against a Wikipedia contributor, because he is Jewish.
No matter what topic I write about, certain people simply ignore the topic, and drag the Zionists (i.e. the Jews) into this. They are not trying to produce encyclopedia quality work; they are out to score points, hurt people, and make themselves feel "liberal".
The comment made by Pizza Puzzle may have been
*personally* offensive to
Robert, but it is simply a statement of PP's own opinion
on the
situation. I may not be popular, but he is entitled to
it.
No, he is not entitled to keep harassing me on my own personal User page about his political views, especially when I am trying to work with others on some science articles.
Presumably user talk pages are meant to be places where
we communicate with
each other in public -- so I don't see why there is a
problem.
So if you are white, then white-haters can taunt you repeatedly on your User page, and you won't have a problem with it?
Zoe is gone due to similar harassment. A few of my other Jewish friends visited (teachers, PhD.s, etc.)...and left quickly, sensing a bit too much self-righteous left-wing animosity towards Jews. (And those same Jews were themselves rather left wing.) They think I am nuts for staying here.
If RK doesn't like a comment, he can erase it -- as he
did -- but
it's a pain in the arse to have to look it up in the
history.
No, I can't! You totally missed the point. When I tried to erase the comment, I was slandered as an Arabophobe.
That, by the way, is untrue. I happen to have lived for two years with a Muslim Arab from Morocco, and had Muslim Palestinian friends in graduate school, and I also happen to support Israeli political parties that are to the left of the current government. I also have particiapted on numerous occasions with interfaith Muslim-Jewish prayer groups, and my synagogue is considered somewhat progressive for precisely this sort of thing.
I am, however, opposed to what the U.S. State Department condemns as Palestinian terrorism...and this last fact alone has caused me to be repeatedly slandered as a bigot, as a racist, etc. And no one on Wikipedia objects to these false characterizations of me. But what this has to do with speciation, creationism and evolution, I'll never know!
It seems pretty clear to me that many people on Wikipedia do not care if one is pro-tolerance and pro-Arab or not. Facts don't matter one whit to one whose conclusions are based only in prejudice. All that many Wikipedians care about is constant proving how evil the Zionist (read: "Jewish") position is, even if they haven't the slightest fucking idea what I actually do or believe.
But my disagreement is less that RK is phobic of Arabs,
but instead
is overly sensitive, perhaps even paranoid, about
anything that isn't
vehemently pro-Israeli/pro-Zionist.
Sorry, Jules, but I disagree. GENETICS AND SPECIATION ARE NOT PRO-ZIONIST. Sorry for shouting, please look at the topics I was working on, and compare them to the comments. Do you see any relation? Of course not; there isn't one. People are lashing out at me simply because I am a Jew. That is not paranoia. It is, however, unacceptable.
I thus ask you to reconsider your comments.
Robert (RK)
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Christopher Mahan wrote:
By the way: It is completely acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them. It's called freedom of speech.
I don't think that has anything to do with the current situation. There is not unlimited free speech on Wikipedia, as we have some conventions. If I went around posting "fuck you nigger" on the user talk page of every person I thought to be black, I would rightly be condemned and possibly even banned, free speech or not.
-Mark
--- Delirium delirium@rufus.d2g.com wrote:
Christopher Mahan wrote:
By the way: It is completely acceptable for people to hold their
own
opinions and express them. It's called freedom of speech.
I don't think that has anything to do with the current situation. There is not unlimited free speech on Wikipedia, as we have some conventions. If I went around posting "fuck you nigger" on the user talk page of
every person I thought to be black, I would rightly be condemned and possibly even banned, free speech or not.
-Mark
True, because those are so-called: "Fighting words" ard are not protected speech. But when someone says: "I disagree with your point of view for the following reasons...", the recipient may /feel/ attacked, but the speaker is within his rights.
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
You miss the point. No matter how "not nice" Robert is, focusing on his ethnicity is inapproriate. He doesn't have to be "cool" for that to be wrong.
Fred
From: Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 10:56:18 -0700 (PDT) To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Unacceptable behaviour
Robert, if you can't be nice, take your marbles to the other side of the playground.
By the way: It is completely acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them. It's called freedom of speech.
--- Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
You miss the point. No matter how "not nice" Robert is, focusing on his ethnicity is inapproriate. He doesn't have to be "cool" for that to be wrong.
I don't care whether he is right or wrong, all I care about is that he express himself in a manner that will not be regarded as confrontational by a bystander.
I don't care about his religious, ethnic, or national background.
Others may be wrong, but just because others are wrong, does not excuse him from leaving the path of civility.
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Christopher Mahan wrote:
Robert, if you can't be nice, take your marbles to the other side of the playground.
By the way: It is completely acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them. It's called freedom of speech.
It is acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them -- but not in an inappropriate forum. One of the cardinal principles of Wikipedia is respect for others, even others with whom we have significant political or other disagreements.
So, it isn't appropriate for people to "Jew bait" RK, nor to bring up the Israeli-Palestinian debate on completely unrelated pages, nor to attempt to engage him in political debates that he isn't interested in.
RK is abrasive at times, and he knows I think so, and I think he knows that it contributes to his difficulties. But he does have a point, and I think we should listen to it and respect it.
--Jimbo
--- Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com wrote:
It is acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them -- but not in an inappropriate forum. One of the cardinal principles of Wikipedia is respect for others, even others with whom we have significant political or other disagreements.
Absolutely. Even more so, in my opinion, of lont-time contributors.
So, it isn't appropriate for people to "Jew bait" RK, nor to bring up the Israeli-Palestinian debate on completely unrelated pages, nor to attempt to engage him in political debates that he isn't interested in.
True. That behavior is also totally reprehensible.
RK is abrasive at times, and he knows I think so, and I think he knows that it contributes to his difficulties. But he does have a point, and I think we should listen to it and respect it.
I agree, and I can sympathise with him. And I do listen to him (I don't just blindly delete his list messages). But I do want him to know that I think that the way he expresses himself in the heat of "righteous outrage" is a bit detrimental to his reputation as far as I am concerned.
Anyway, back to my aviation articles...
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Christopher Mahan wrote:
It is acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them -- but not in an inappropriate forum. One of the cardinal principles of Wikipedia is respect for others, even others with whom we have significant political or other disagreements.
Absolutely. Even more so, in my opinion, of long-time contributors.
In a sense, I suppose. But once we're long-time contributors, we are friends (to a degree), and we can probably take a little heat, although it's best if it's kept private or avoided entirely when we can.
If I had to choose between "act more respectuflly towards old-timers" or "act more respectfually towards newcomers", I'd tend to favor the latter. But I don't think there's any "more so" needed.
I don't always follow my own advice here -- none of us always do, and that's part of the human condition. But courtesy and kindness is powerful magic, and we should use it in all cases to our best advantage.
But I do want him to know that I think that the way he expresses himself in the heat of "righteous outrage" is a bit detrimental to his reputation as far as I am concerned.
Well, I'm sure he's listening with an open heart to what you are saying.
--Jimbo
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Christopher Mahan wrote:
It is acceptable for people to hold their own opinions and express them -- but not in an inappropriate forum. One of the cardinal principles of Wikipedia is respect for others, even others with whom we have significant political or other disagreements.
Absolutely. Even more so, in my opinion, of long-time contributors.
In a sense, I suppose. But once we're long-time contributors, we are friends (to a degree), and we can probably take a little heat, although it's best if it's kept private or avoided entirely when we can.
If I had to choose between "act more respectuflly towards old-timers" or "act more respectfually towards newcomers", I'd tend to favor the latter. But I don't think there's any "more so" needed.
I don't always follow my own advice here -- none of us always do, and that's part of the human condition. But courtesy and kindness is powerful magic, and we should use it in all cases to our best advantage.
But I do want him to know that I think that the way he expresses himself in the heat of "righteous outrage" is a bit detrimental to his reputation as far as I am concerned.
Well, I'm sure he's listening with an open heart to what you are saying.
Being too quick to treat a comment as offensive, or being excessive in reaction never helps. There is often a world of difference between egregious anti-Semitism and perceived anti-Semitism; I would tend to give the writer the benefit of the doubt. When the writer has been shown how his comment could be viewed as anti-Semitic, and has acknowledged the fact, that should be the end of the matter.
Ec
Robert wrote:
I am, however, opposed to what the U.S. State Department condemns as Palestinian terrorism...and this last fact alone has caused me to be repeatedly slandered as a bigot, as a racist, etc. And no one on Wikipedia objects to these false characterizations of me.
For whatever it is worth, I object to those false characterizations of you. And for two reasons:
1. These characterizations are, as far as I can tell, completely false and without merit of any kind.
2. And in *any event*, characterizations of this sort have no place in the neutral wikipedia community, whether true or false. It's just not the kind of environment that we want to foster.
On the other hand, I will say that I sometimes find RK's characterization of the harassment he has personally received to be a bit overstated.
Of course, different people will evaluate these things differently, and it's easy for me to stand *outside* RK's situation and say "Oh, it isn't as bad as all that." I understand that.
Even so, I think it's worth remembering what we're all here for, and that Wikipedia Is Not Usenet. We fundamentally aren't about flame wars and personal slams, at least we should try hard not to be about that. The medium in which we are working (wiki) pushes us to a different kind of interaction, interaction which is co-operative rather than competitive.
--Jimbo