In a message dated 5/3/2006 1:50:45 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jwales@wikia.com writes:

Mark Gallagher wrote:

And then you get people who'll insist that an article MUST remain the way it is simply because its subject doesn't want it to.

Such people should be beaten hard with the nearest available cluebat.

Moderation in all things.

Ok you are right. Such people should be beaten _moderately_ with the nearest available cluebat. ;-)

What kind of statement is this? Are you joking or are you serious? I am not a Wikipedian, nor do I have any desire to become one. I happened across the plasma cosmology page and was dismayed by the incorrect and misinformed information presented there. When I tried to make corrections, which is how this thing is supposed to work out, all my efforts were reverted. I have been insulted repeatedly, blocked twice because I suggested that such behavior would amount to legal action in the real world, now I have been blanked because my citations on the talk page are beyond, I presume, the attention span of the big bang group in charge of the plasma cosmology page who don't like what I have done. Wikipedia is NOT produced by the people. the people may make the initial contributions, but it soon taken over by the powers to be. And if those admins are challenged, they resort to personal attacks and intimidation. At least that has been my experience. When I raised the question of "ethics" on this list, the reply was "A good wikipedian can do what he damn well pleases." A few agreed and that was the end of ethics. Not all Wikireaders are stupid, and when a cancer is not only allowed but supported by admins, then it is only a matter of time. And that time will come. You can call me a crank and infer a pathology all you want, I know what I am without relying on some high school student's opinion. It is sad though when the one person who had a wonderful idea and saw it though fails to lift himself above the lowest.

Tommy mandel