[[User:Pakaran]] left the following message at [[User talk:RickK]]:
"Hi, thanks for the info. I agree that the "red faction" thing has gone too far. :Feel free to block all addreses adding communist POV to the wikipedia."
For verification [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:RickK&diff=0&ol... compare the two versions].
The ideological censorship endorsed by [[User:Pakaran]] constitutes a blatant abuse of admin powers. Developers, who have the power need to suspend adminships, need to monitor the behavior Pakaran.
RickK did not make these comments, so we have to give him the benefit of the doubt. This is far worse than a single misuse of sysop powers. Over the course of the 15 months that I've been contributing to Wikipedia, I've never seen any statement vis-à-vis sysop powers so appalling. We can all screw up from time to time, but to have a sysop openly advocating ideological CENSORSHIP by means of bans and blocks might be unprecedented. Unless the statements are retracted clearly and unambiguously, this is a case for quick and permanent suspension of sysop powers.
Also, please see my comments at [[Wikipedia:Conflicts between users]]. The specter of McCarthyism is haunting Wikipedia. The comments by User:Pakaran are merely an example of a broader, overarching pattern; the abuse of users who hold unpopular beliefs is practically out in the open now and out of control.
Recently, e.g., [[User:Adam Carr]] has been seeking to discrediting me for having a more sympathetic view of the Sunshine Policy of former South Korean President and Nobel Peace Prize Winner Kim Dae-jung and negotiations with the DPRK.
For this, Adam has been going from page to page, attempting to discredit me as an "apologist for Stalinism." For the sake of argument, if one goes by his standards, Madeline Albright, e.g., who visited the DPRK late in the Clinton administration, would also be Stalinist dupe. For crying out loud, this might even be absurd to the John Birch Society. Dr. Carr, however, isn't an idiot; he knows what he's doing. He knows that sloganeering, browbeating, and McCarthyism allow him to mobilize support on Wiki whenever his edits are being challenged. If you're ever in an edit war, just call your opponent a Commie and let mob rule take care of everything!!
Only a handful of users seem to care about fostering pluralism, diversity, tolerance, and mutual respect on Wiki these days. Fortunately, site owner Jimbo Wales is the most ardent defender of a pluralistic community of users. His guidance is desperately needed at this point.
Mr. Wales, whom I'm deeply respect for founding this experiment in applying a certain set of principles, needs to explain to these "anti-Communist" advocates of censorship the differences between liberty and fascism.
_________________________________________________________________ Fast. Reliable. Get MSN 9 Dial-up - 3 months for the price of 1! (Limited-time Offer) http://click.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/
Abe Sokolov wrote:
Only a handful of users seem to care about fostering pluralism, diversity, tolerance, and mutual respect on Wiki these days. Fortunately, site owner Jimbo Wales is the most ardent defender of a pluralistic community of users. His guidance is desperately needed at this point.
Mr. Wales, whom I'm deeply respect for founding this experiment in applying a certain set of principles, needs to explain to these "anti-Communist" advocates of censorship the differences between liberty and fascism.
Yes, while not commenting on the specifics of this dispute, because I just now looked at the web pages and couldn't come to a firm understanding of what's going on yet, I will say that absolutely, Wikipedia is *not* anti-communist, and that banning people for ideological reasons would be a horrible precedent.
--Jimbo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Jimmy Wales wrote: | Abe Sokolov wrote: | |>Only a handful of users seem to care about fostering pluralism, diversity, |>tolerance, and mutual respect on Wiki these days. Fortunately, site owner |>Jimbo Wales is the most ardent defender of a pluralistic community of |>users. His guidance is desperately needed at this point. |> |>Mr. Wales, whom I'm deeply respect for founding this experiment in |>applying a certain set of principles, needs to explain to these |>"anti-Communist" advocates of censorship the differences between liberty |>and fascism. | | | Yes, while not commenting on the specifics of this dispute, because I | just now looked at the web pages and couldn't come to a firm | understanding of what's going on yet, I will say that absolutely, | Wikipedia is *not* anti-communist, and that banning people for | ideological reasons would be a horrible precedent. | | --Jimbo
Ok, to clarify - first of all, I wasn't thinking, and posted late at night. This is of course not an excuse. I should have phrased my remark more carefully.
The issue is *one user* - the "red faction" vandal - who did things like replacing all of the village pump with "RED FACTION". I was replying to RickK's comment about that user's registering as User:Jesus Chirst (sic). This is a user who has gotten banned for vandalism of various pages pretty often, and has continued annoying me on AIM.
I do not advocate banning "all communists" any more than I advocate banning "all iridologists" or "all pepsi lovers." Personally, I think that, when handled properly, communism can be quite successful and respectful for all citizens. It is true that bad things have been done in its name, but bad things have been done in the name of the Bible as well, and few would say that that makes the Bible "bad."
To give an idea of what this person has "contributed":
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=...
Again - Wikipedia's place is not to make judgements or exclude communists or other belief systems. This should go without saying.
Nathan
O.k., your explanation makes sense to me totally.
Nathan Russell wrote:
Personally, I think that, when handled properly, communism can be quite successful and respectful for all citizens.
Well, we'll have to disagree about that. :-)
But I've promised myself not to talk about politics on wikien-l any more than absolutely necessary, so I will shut up now.
--Jimbo