Nat,
I do disagree with RK calling anyone he dislikes a Nazi, but that's a separate issue.
I have tried to stay silent for a week, but the threats and personal attacks just keep on coming.
Do you really believe this craziness about me? I did no such thing. I have made many hundreds of edits on over a hundreds of different Wikipedia articles. Just like everyone else here, I often have had disagreements with other people. So what? We don't go around attacking each other as Nazis. That is simply a fabrication.
Your problem is that you are taking a specific set of related incidents that happened here, and then incorrectly assume that I write the same thing about every person I disagree with. That's absolutely false, as well as insulting.
Do you have any idea of what the specific issue actually was? An anonymous Wiki-En contributor wrote a detailed analysis proving that Stevertigo was posting anti-Semitic material, and posting Holocaust denial. Every one of these edits was made in accord with either Nazi or Christian Identity ideology. Stevertigo was then supported by Martin Harper ("MyRedDice") who supported and encouraged all of these Jew-baiting edits. A number of other anonymous people dropped by to help Martin and Stevertigo as well. Many of the edit lines had Jew-baiting comments. (Which, fortunately, a few fellow Wikipedians recognized and commented on. I was not alone by a long shot in this phase of the process.)
Did you actually read this analysis?
However, when this issue was brought to the attention of the Wiki-En list, I was slandered, called a liar, and worst of all, many Wiki-En supporters wrote in support of Stevertigo and Martin Harper. Incredibly, no one was publicly willing to speak out against anti-Semitic propaganda and Holocaust denial. (A few people wrote me in private to support me, but they stated that they were afraid to post publicly here. I can now see why; they were right all along about this place.)
Look, when people write in support of Nazi propaganda (and there is no debate about the edits in question), then in those select cases we are forced to admit that they are, by definition, anti-Semitic. The same would be true of people who wrote in support of racist anti-black propaganda.
The Wiki-En list is currently ruled by an elite clique of political left-wingers who won't allow any un-PC writings about Arabs, gays, blacks, Asians, women or socialists. Yet this same clique is so anti-Zionist that they will support outright anti-Semitism and Christian identity or Nazi propaganda, just as a way to make the "enemy" look bad.
In recent weeks BL and Mr-Natural-Health have been trying to scare my off of Wikipedia by implying that they might be, or actually are, Nazis. This isn't a joke. This is violent hatespeech.
No one on Wikipedia would allow a group of contributors to drive away a black person by others posing as members of the Ku Klux Klan. Such a person would be banned immediately. Yet the only case when such hateful and violent actions are allowed here are when people say they are Nazis, and when they are targeting Jews.
When Wiki-En members are supportive of such actions, that (by definition) is anti-Semitism. If this doesn't bother someone, then this tells us how they really feel about Jews: That Jews are only allowed to contribute here if they follow a pro-Arab left-wing line. Otherwise, let the self-proclaimed Nazis drive them off.
On the other hand, if you do not support such harassment, then you are morally obligated to speak out, and to ask for these people to be banned. We should not allow sucvh violent hatespeech to drive people away. Editing encyclopedia articles should depend on facts, sources and historical considerations alone.
Robert (RK)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
You exaggerate Robert, Partly as PC, as you put it, is so long as interpreted sensibly, is simply courtesy and avoidance of prejudicial conclusionary statements unsupported by evidence. Partly when you characterize them as an "elite clique of political left-wingers". These are real people, usually with an academic background (graduates of the Gulag would not fit in) but to say they "rule" Wikipedia is simply false. They are simply people who lack practical experience. But Wikipedia to a great extent by its nature reflects academic knowledge.
Could you please (I know well how difficult this would be) give at least one instance (please give the Wikipedia URL's of the statement and its removal or modidication) of an un-PC writing which was not allowed by them in each of the fields:
Arabs
Gays
Blacks
Asians
Women
Socialists
Fred
From: Robert rkscience100@yahoo.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 07:54:43 -0800 (PST) To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] On continued personal attacks,threats, etc.
The Wiki-En list is currently ruled by an elite clique of political left-wingers who won't allow any un-PC writings about Arabs, gays, blacks, Asians, women or socialists. Yet this same clique is so anti-Zionist that they will support outright anti-Semitism and Christian identity or Nazi propaganda, just as a way to make the "enemy" look bad.
Robert wrote:
Nat,
I do disagree with RK calling anyone he dislikes a Nazi, but that's a separate issue.
I have tried to stay silent for a week, but the threats and personal attacks just keep on coming.
Personal attacks are not acceptable behaviour, and should be condemned in their own right. On the other hand extrapolating those attacks on one individual into evidence of generalized anti-semitism is not a logical consequence. To the extent that apparently anti-semitic comments are made, I would suggest that they do not really reflect that attitude. Some people simply use them because they know that one particular individual will have excessive reactions. This sort of thing happens all the time on playgrounds. Although neither practice is socially acceptable, a distinction still needs to be made between generalized jew-baiting and baiting one specific Jew.
However, when this issue was brought to the attention of the Wiki-En list, I was slandered, called a liar, and worst of all, many Wiki-En supporters wrote in support of Stevertigo and Martin Harper. Incredibly, no one was publicly willing to speak out against anti-Semitic propaganda and Holocaust denial.
Some of us might think that jumping into these topics would be feeding trolls. Directly confronting Holocaust denial gives it a credibility that it could never achieve by itself.
Look, when people write in support of Nazi propaganda (and there is no debate about the edits in question), then in those select cases we are forced to admit that they are, by definition, anti-Semitic.
This is a non-sequitur. Nazi propaganda dealt with many more issues than just anti-semitic ones. As with any political party, a general support of that party does not imply supporting every policy on that party's platform. With a limited number of parties one is often confronted at an election with trying to choose the least evil.
The Wiki-En list is currently ruled by an elite clique of political left-wingers who won't allow any un-PC writings about Arabs, gays, blacks, Asians, women or socialists. Yet this same clique is so anti-Zionist that they will support outright anti-Semitism and Christian identity or Nazi propaganda, just as a way to make the "enemy" look bad.
That is outright nonsense. In U.S. politics I've seen Jews, to their credit, more often associated with the Democratic Party and left-wing causes. The real hardcore fundamentalist anti-semites have a greater affinity with the other side of the spectrum. And please don't confuse anti-Zionism with anti-semitism.
When Wiki-En members are supportive of such actions, that (by definition) is anti-Semitism.
No, it is anti-RK-ism.
Ec
And please don't confuse anti-Zionism with anti-semitism.
Ec
Although you're right that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are different, you're not likely to get very far just saying it considering the recent New Yorker cover article saying the opposite.
Even if someone in Wikipedia is anti-semetic, unless he or she is making threats, I don't see why any of it is Wikipedia's buisness.
LDan
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus