On 11 Jul 2007 at 23:28:53 +0100, Zoney zoney.ie@gmail.com wrote:
"Wikipedia-style consensus"
That's defined as:
Character-assassinate everybody who disagrees with your side of a dispute, by applying every label you think can possibly be made to stick, such as:
1. Troll 2. Single-purpose account 3. Partisan of an attack site 4. Sockpuppet 5. Meatpuppet 6. Seems to live in the same state as a banned user 7. Was once warned about bad behavior by an admin 8. Seems to have similar opinions to a banned user 9. Has a low edit count 10. Has too few edits in main article space; thus not a useful contributor 11. Has too few edits outside main article space; thus not knowledgeable in policy and governance issues 12. Has mostly been fighting vandals; has no real experience making substantive edits 13. Hasn't been fighting vandals enough; has no familiarity with how pernicious and harmful they are, so their opinion on anything pertaining to this is suspect
Once all opposing views are successfully labeled, then claim a consensus because all remaining people agree.
On 12/07/07, Daniel R. Tobias dan@tobias.name wrote:
On 11 Jul 2007 at 23:28:53 +0100, Zoney zoney.ie@gmail.com wrote:
"Wikipedia-style consensus"
That's defined as:
Character-assassinate everybody who disagrees with your side of a dispute, by applying every label you think can possibly be made to stick, such as:
- Troll
- Single-purpose account
- Partisan of an attack site
- Sockpuppet
- Meatpuppet
- Seems to live in the same state as a banned user
- Was once warned about bad behavior by an admin
- Seems to have similar opinions to a banned user
- Has a low edit count
- Has too few edits in main article space; thus not a useful
contributor 11. Has too few edits outside main article space; thus not knowledgeable in policy and governance issues 12. Has mostly been fighting vandals; has no real experience making substantive edits 13. Hasn't been fighting vandals enough; has no familiarity with how pernicious and harmful they are, so their opinion on anything pertaining to this is suspect
Once all opposing views are successfully labeled, then claim a consensus because all remaining people agree.
-- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
oooh will you just drop it already. we get your point (and i for one agree with you) but it's getting on my nerves seeing you pop up all over the place with lots of irrelevant repetitive commentary about people you dont like.
On 7/11/07, Daniel R. Tobias dan@tobias.name wrote:
On 11 Jul 2007 at 23:28:53 +0100, Zoney zoney.ie@gmail.com wrote:
"Wikipedia-style consensus"
That's defined as:
Character-assassinate everybody who disagrees with your side of a dispute, by applying every label you think can possibly be made to stick, such as:
- Troll
- Single-purpose account
- Partisan of an attack site
- Sockpuppet
- Meatpuppet
- Seems to live in the same state as a banned user
- Was once warned about bad behavior by an admin
- Seems to have similar opinions to a banned user
- Has a low edit count
- Has too few edits in main article space; thus not a useful
contributor 11. Has too few edits outside main article space; thus not knowledgeable in policy and governance issues 12. Has mostly been fighting vandals; has no real experience making substantive edits 13. Hasn't been fighting vandals enough; has no familiarity with how pernicious and harmful they are, so their opinion on anything pertaining to this is suspect
Once all opposing views are successfully labeled, then claim a consensus because all remaining people agree.
This is suitable for framing. Please paste it on my old user page if you would.
—C.W.
On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 20:01:43 -0400, "Daniel R. Tobias" dan@tobias.name wrote:
(blah blah bah)
Do you want salt and vinegar o those chips, or will it ruin the shoulders of your hair shirt?
Guy (JzG)