The Cunctator wrote:

On 3/13/06, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:

...

Delirium wrote:

...

How can we talk about things on a mailing list of we aren't allowed to use words and phrases?

Nobody's denying you the ability to use words and phrases. I'm pointing out that these words and phrases are being used as rhetoric, and that insisting other people should agree to and adopt your rhetoric is counterproductive.

1. He never insisted that other people should agree to and adopt your rhetoric.
2. You're misusing the word rhetoric.
3. Contrary to your above claim, Jimbo wrote "Current policy does not

let anyone go "over the head" of editors and the Wikimedia Foundation does not deal with them in a "top-down manner"." That is, he flatly denied Delirium's words.

Not Jimbo's best moment, and it was followed up by an apology for his tone. Still, I consider that a denial that Delirium's characterization is accurate, as might be expected given Jimbo's position. Not a denial of Delirium's ability or freedom to make such a characterization, which would be a more serious concern.

The only thing that Delirium has been insisting on is his right to use that language himself -- not that others have to agree lock, stock and barrel to it.

Well, that's not how I understood this message in particular: http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-March/041721.html

Wherein Delirium calls Jimbo's response "blatantly counterfactual" and with his insistent questioning, seems to indicate that there's no alternative but to adopt his characterization. If that's an overinterpretation on my part, and he's willing to agree that other people can legitimately see these events as not "going over the head" of editors and operating in a "top-down manner", then I would be glad to hear it.

--Michael Snow