I am having some severe problems with User:Susan_Mason. I am not writing to you merely about the problems with hercontent: She has the disturbing tendency to make stuff up off the top of her head and claim it to be fact, and then insult Wikipedia contributors such as SLR who present scholarship that rebut her. I am not merely talking about her refusal to support her claims, and her personal attacks on people who do support their claims with references.
I am forced to write here because she has a disturbing tendency to make stuff up about people; she invents positions that they do not have, and then attacks people for these things which were never even said in the first place.
She has done this quite a bit, but her most recent attack on me crosses the line. She now slanders me as a racist. For some time now I have been telling Stevertigo that on the English Wikipedia, we should write our content and sign our names in English langauge and in English letters. Yet he still refuses to do so, and is still signing letters in non-English characters that cannot be displayed on many computer terminals. (Mine, for instance, and also on the computers I use at work.)
Out of nowhere, Susan Mason effectively called me a racist by writing "What? Chinese people aren't allowed to contribute to the english wiki?"
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Idolatry
This is a bald-faced lie, a libelous smear against me. She is implying that I am bigoted against Chinese people, when all I am asking is that we use English letters on the English Wikipedia.
This is just the latest in a long line of incidents where she has attacked other Wikipedia community members for things that they just never said, and it is really out of hand.
Sincerely,
RK
===== "I prefer a wicked person who knows he is wicked, to a righteous person who knows he is righteous". The Seer of Lublin [Jacob Isaac Ha-Hozeh Mi-Lublin, 1745-1815]
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/
Lir is always going to be Lir, no matter what name he uses. Zoe Robert rkscience100@yahoo.com wrote:I am having some severe problems with User:Susan_Mason. I am not writing to you merely about the problems with hercontent: She has the disturbing tendency to make stuff up off the top of her head and claim it to be fact, and then insult Wikipedia contributors such as SLR who present scholarship that rebut her. I am not merely talking about her refusal to support her claims, and her personal attacks on people who do support their claims with references.
I am forced to write here because she has a disturbing tendency to make stuff up about people; she invents positions that they do not have, and then attacks people for these things which were never even said in the first place.
She has done this quite a bit, but her most recent attack on me crosses the line. She now slanders me as a racist. For some time now I have been telling Stevertigo that on the English Wikipedia, we should write our content and sign our names in English langauge and in English letters. Yet he still refuses to do so, and is still signing letters in non-English characters that cannot be displayed on many computer terminals. (Mine, for instance, and also on the computers I use at work.)
Out of nowhere, Susan Mason effectively called me a racist by writing "What? Chinese people aren't allowed to contribute to the english wiki?"
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Idolatry
This is a bald-faced lie, a libelous smear against me. She is implying that I am bigoted against Chinese people, when all I am asking is that we use English letters on the English Wikipedia.
This is just the latest in a long line of incidents where she has attacked other Wikipedia community members for things that they just never said, and it is really out of hand.
Sincerely,
RK
===== "I prefer a wicked person who knows he is wicked, to a righteous person who knows he is righteous". The Seer of Lublin [Jacob Isaac Ha-Hozeh Mi-Lublin, 1745-1815]
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more
If we can establish firmly that Susan Mason is Lir, then obviously the old ban just carries over and that's the end of it. I'm not willing to say that just yet, although I'm eager to do so if someone can give me good evidence -- it saves me the hassle of trying to adjudicate, after all.
Barring that, I think that all that's warranted by *what I've seen so far*, is a strong warning against personal attacks.
I say this even though the remark to RK on [[Talk:Idolatry]] was absurd and a personal attack, *and* exhibited the same kind of bizarre "logic" about Anglicization as Lir's usual.
--Jimbo
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jimmy Wales" jwales@bomis.com To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 8:10 AM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Problems with Susan Mason
If we can establish firmly that Susan Mason is Lir, then obviously the old ban just carries over and that's the end of it. I'm not willing to say that just yet, although I'm eager to do so if someone can give me good evidence -- it saves me the hassle of trying to adjudicate, after all.
Barring that, I think that all that's warranted by *what I've seen so far*, is a strong warning against personal attacks.
I say this even though the remark to RK on [[Talk:Idolatry]] was absurd and a personal attack, *and* exhibited the same kind of bizarre "logic" about Anglicization as Lir's usual.
I would characterize Susan/Lir's comments to RK as perhaps reasonable, considering RK, and her exasperation... She cant turn to official channels if she's Lir, and she no doubt felt alone in fending an off an equal-but-opposing strain of rampant Evangelism... The point is that its deeper than just the issue of superficial civility- dealings with Robert often involve varied dimensions of uncivil conduct... many are not apparent. He being my own personal tail for blanket-article-revertings is one of them...
What I really want to know is.. why do people think that she's Lir? I repeat it based solely off of a comment Zoe made to her on a talk page... I emailed Susan directly for an answer, and when I did not get one, surmised that it was true... This was all under the premise that the sysops knew it for a fact, based on a static IP and other evidence... Why has this gone on so long, if there is definitive proof of.... and why is the accusation of, allowed and promulgated here if it is inuendo without basis? -Stevertigo
Stevertigo wrote:
I would characterize Susan/Lir's comments to RK as perhaps reasonable, considering RK, and her exasperation... She cant turn to official channels if she's Lir,
If she's Lir, nothing she does is reasonable, since Lir/Bridget/Adam/Vera Cruz is banned.
If she's not Lir, then this particular response is still unreasonable. *If* RK is doing bad things, then the *best possible response* is to be extremely careful to follow the utmost standards of civility, so as to leave a firm paper trail that RK is the one doing something wrong.
What I really want to know is.. why do people think that she's Lir?
The style is the same, the hot button issues are the same. Lir used to say that it's racist to use English spellings for foreign words in the English encyclopedia. Susan suggests that RK is racist against Chinese people because he complained about your use of Kanji for your username. That's more or less the same argument, and ridiculous in both cases.
This was all under the premise that the sysops knew it for a fact, based on a static IP and other evidence...
Susan edits via an AOL dynamic ip. So this proves essentially nothing.
Why has this gone on so long, if there is definitive proof of.... and why is the accusation of, allowed and promulgated here if it is inuendo without basis?
It's not without basis, it's intelligent speculation. But, as I've said, it's not confirmed, and so I'm not going to act on it without something more definitive.
--Jimbo
SV wrote: Why has this gone on so long, if there is definitive proof of.... and why is the accusation of, allowed and promulgated here if it is inuendo without basis?
JW wrote: It's not without basis, it's intelligent speculation. But, as
I've
said, it's not confirmed, and so I'm not going to act on it without something more definitive.
Ah, thanks. So its very touchy... like the prob with 142... Three things, (nobody respond until the 'tenor'... comes back..;)... 1.Was Lir, as rumored, working for a corporate encyclopedia? 2.If were essentially stuck with him/her, in one incarnation or another, can we deal with her issues perhaps one-by-one in a collective way, with some tenor, considering the possibility that the new incarnation is not her..., rather than carry over the baggage of.. 3.It does'nt strike me as valid to characterise all of her edits as vandalism, nor too unreasonable (usually)... just monolithic in her judgements and exacerbatory in the talk... A natural human tendency of the marginalized - I might point out. -Stevertigo
Stevertigo wrote:
1.Was Lir, as rumored, working for a corporate encyclopedia?
I've never even heard this rumor. That's almost certainly false.
This is Lir's website: http://qwert.diaryland.com/
Make of it what you will. :-)
3.It does'nt strike me as valid to characterise all of her edits as vandalism,
No, of course not.
--Jimbo
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Susan suggests that RK is racist against Chinese people because he complained about your use of Kanji for your username. That's more or less the same argument, and ridiculous in both cases.
On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Toby Bartels wrote:
("racist", Susan Mason's word, is indefensible, I agree.)
I know that defending Susan Mason is very much a minority pursuit around here, but I should point out that at no point on [[Talk:Idolatry]] (where this all started) did Susan accuse anyone of racism. I've just checked all of this user's edits on that page, to make sure.
The offending quote was, "What? Chinese people aren't allowed to contribute to the english wiki?" It was RK who characterised this as racism, saying, "Susan Mason effectively called me a racist".
Susan's statement was of course badly worded, but I don't see it as an accusation of racism, myself: it's about what writing systems one uses, not about what race one belongs to. And please let's not argue about whether or not one *could* interpret as racist. My point is that Susan didn't use the word "racist", and the statement can be interpreted in other ways. This mailing list often seems to get into these "Chinese whispers" situations where people's positions get distorted, and I think we should all be sure to check our sources. We should be experts at that, working on an encyclopaedia project!
Oliver
P.S. - Jimbo and Toby - don't take this as a personal criticism. You're both great people, and it's just unfortunate that your messages were the ones I found to use as examples...
+-------------------------------------------+ | Oliver Pereira | | Dept. of Electronics and Computer Science | | University of Southampton | | omp199@ecs.soton.ac.uk | +-------------------------------------------+
Oliver reported: The offending quote was, "What? Chinese people aren't allowed to contribute to the english wiki?" It was RK who characterised this as racism, saying, "Susan Mason effectively called me a racist".
Susan's statement was of course badly worded, but I don't see it as an accusation of racism, myself: it's about what writing systems one uses, not about what race one belongs to. And please let's not argue about whether or not one *could* interpret as racist. My point is that Susan didn't use the word "racist"...
Fine work, Oliver. As if there was any doubt. I think the unsubstantiated accusation of racism merits banning. At least temporarily. Robert is one of those... and we know what I mean by that. Its really not my idea of a good time to get into twenty little edit wars about this or that. And RK's reactionist tendencies are more than annoying, disruptive and non-cooperative.. they are insulting, and violating, and if a version of him from any other cultural persuasion, came along, and he ran into himself, their personalities would clash in an instant, and the basis of it would be perspective and nothing more. Its the spirit of NPOV, in a nutshell that Robert has yet to take to heart... and I hate to single anyone out like this, because stubborness in people - an unwillingness to concede even a point, is hard to communicate with.
Susan may be a bit loopy, but she's starting to mellow out, it seems. Shes talking things over more. Making alliances and giving greater consideration... but its RK who's still an ominous presence, though he has shelter of others... who have deemed his contributions valuable. I dont dispute the man's contributions as 'valuable,' I dispute them as being 'contributions' - in the spirit of contributing. It's amazing to me that the community has allowed his standardized, accusatory rampages (not worth repeating) to persist, whilst he can voice complaints of Susan's, mine and others, "accusations." If the accusation alone is the offense... let us not be inconsistent with regards to whom we speak of. Give me Wikilove or give me death... -Esteban
Oliver Pereira wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
("racist", Susan Mason's word, is indefensible, I agree.)
I know that defending Susan Mason is very much a minority pursuit around here, but I should point out that at no point on [[Talk:Idolatry]] (where this all started) did Susan accuse anyone of racism. I've just checked all of this user's edits on that page, to make sure.
Then I owe Susan an apology. What I was trying to do was to draw a contrast between the neutral word "segregation" and the value-laden word "racism". (Segregation is not racism, except of course for segregation by race.) It's not really relevant whether anybody actually called anyone a racist. The point is, if people are not charging one with bigotry, then one shouldn't be offended as if they were.
Susan's statement was of course badly worded, but I don't see it as an accusation of racism, myself: it's about what writing systems one uses, not about what race one belongs to. And please let's not argue about whether or not one *could* interpret as racist. My point is that Susan didn't use the word "racist", and the statement can be interpreted in other ways.
In fact, this is basically my point. ^_^
P.S. - Jimbo and Toby - don't take this as a personal criticism. You're both great people, and it's just unfortunate that your messages were the ones I found to use as examples...
I'll take it as a *correction*, not a *criticism*. And thanks for the compliment.
-- Toby
Oliver Pereira wrote:
I know that defending Susan Mason is very much a minority pursuit around here, but I should point out that at no point on [[Talk:Idolatry]] (where this all started) did Susan accuse anyone of racism. I've just checked all of this user's edits on that page, to make sure.
Right, well, I did too, and that's why I said that what was said was not, in and of itself, a bannable offense. If Susan Mason is not Lir, then only some gentle correction is necessary.
You can count me very much in the camp of people who thinks that Susan Mason probably is Lir, and who thinks that it's only a matter of time until this comes out clearly. I hope I'm wrong.
P.S. - Jimbo and Toby - don't take this as a personal criticism. You're both great people, and it's just unfortunate that your messages were the ones I found to use as examples...
No, that's fine. I'm very interested in fairness, and you're right that it's important that we not get into "witch hunt" mode.
--Jimbo