On 4/10/03 11:16 AM, "Robert" <rkscience100(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I am apalled by Fred Bauder's personal attacks on
me. He
claimed to have read the Talk page for the Idolatry
article, yet in point of fact Fred Bauder failed to mention
all of the flames that "Dietary Fiber" write about to me,
Fred failed to mention the fact that Dietary Fiber is on
some quest to attack my personal religious beliefs (which
is blatantly inappropriate on Wikipedia); Fred "overlooked"
the forged quote, and then Fred only quoted my response to
the trolling...and then stated that _I_ should be put on
some sort of watch.
I am saddened by his behaviour. If Fred Bauder cannot
control himself, let him go elsewhere until he calms down.
Some of us have serious work to do.
Oh, please. Fred quoted actual material, while RK characterizes other
people's comments as "personal attacks", "flames", and
"trolling", without
making direct quotes.
It is not standard Wikipedia policy to move discussion from entry pages to
user pages; it's not necessarily wrong to do so, but in the case of the text
RK moved
(
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Dietary_Fiber&old…
09427), the text is clearly in context and impersonal, and RK's action was
inappropriate.
Then RK seemed to get a bee in his bonnet for DF's paraphrase of RK's
statement
This article then points out that this view is not accepted
by many liberal Chrisitans and Jews, is not accepted by
modern historical studies of religion.
with this statement (by DF)
You indicated that idolatry has a non-religious meaning by
referring to a "liberal/scholary" view; as opposed to a
religious view.
which certainly seems to be a fair paraphrase--though the quotes shouldn't
have been there. Then the discussion went southward. But RK certainly threw
the first punch.
In other words, RK is unjustifiably, and viciously, attacking first Dietary
Fiber, and now Fred Bauder. I'm appalled, and saddened. And appalled.
as always,
tc