The N in NPOV doesn't stand for No, it stands for Nuetral. Every article has a POV, and many articles contain moral judgement without violating NPOV.
True... but the N doesn't stand for Nazi, either... keep that in mind.
This discussion keeps reminding me of a photo I saw once that moved me alot (I can't seem to find it now). In it a black woman had thrown herself on top of a severely beaten KKK member in order to save him from an angry crowd. She had the moral highground. The newly appointed arbiter appears not to.
Jack (Sam Spade)
Alot of people here seem to be saying "these are nazi's, so rules don't apply". The problem is, thats how they think, and such back and forth abuses perpetuate the cycle. Moral behaviour however can BREAK the cycle, and allow people to grow morally and move on. I spent a few years trying to explain that to an ARA skinhead friend I knew. Sadly he never learned, and I stopped talking to him when he began abusing his pregnant girlfriend.
Jack (Sam Spade)
Hey, come on, let's not make this difference of opinion personal.
Jake
On Thursday 25 August 2005 19:44, Jack Lynch wrote:
This discussion keeps reminding me of a photo I saw once that moved me alot (I can't seem to find it now). In it a black woman had thrown herself on top of a severely beaten KKK member in order to save him from an angry crowd. She had the moral highground. The newly appointed arbiter appears not to.
Jack (Sam Spade) _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
From: Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com
This discussion keeps reminding me of a photo I saw once that moved me alot (I can't seem to find it now). In it a black woman had thrown herself on top of a severely beaten KKK member in order to save him from an angry crowd. She had the moral highground. The newly appointed arbiter appears not to.
If you're referring to me, please desist from misrepresenting my position, or from making tortuous, specious, captious, and casuistic analogies regarding me.
Jay.
I dont think the last few comments have been very helpful. Jay has yet to give Michael a straight answer on the specific block issue. Jays claim that the use of an ancient ethnic name as provokational is really very one-sided and has little substance, as is his representation of that history. And Jack's personal speculations about Jay's objectivity are flamebait at best.
SV " And let's also not forget..let's not forget... Dude..that keeping wildlife, an amphibious rodent, for uh, domestic, you know, within the city... That isn't legal either."
--- Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com wrote:
This discussion keeps reminding me of a photo I saw once that moved me alot (I can't seem to find it now). In it a black woman had thrown herself on top of a severely beaten KKK member in order to save him from an angry crowd. She had the moral highground. The newly appointed arbiter appears not to.
____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
I wasn't speculating, I was making an observation. I apologise if anyone felt it was flamebait, or overly personal. I felt it touched on a very important fact, the views on policy presented publically by a newly appointed arbiter.
Jack (Sam Spade)
On 8/25/05, steve v vertigosteve@yahoo.com wrote:
I dont think the last few comments have been very helpful. Jay has yet to give Michael a straight answer on the specific block issue. Jays claim that the use of an ancient ethnic name as provokational is really very one-sided and has little substance, as is his representation of that history. And Jack's personal speculations about Jay's objectivity are flamebait at best.
SV " And let's also not forget..let's not forget... Dude..that keeping wildlife, an amphibious rodent, for uh, domestic, you know, within the city... That isn't legal either."
--- Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com wrote:
This discussion keeps reminding me of a photo I saw once that moved me alot (I can't seem to find it now). In it a black woman had thrown herself on top of a severely beaten KKK member in order to save him from an angry crowd. She had the moral highground. The newly appointed arbiter appears not to.
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
From: Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com
I wasn't speculating, I was making an observation.
Right. "It's not a personal attack if it's true". How many times have I seen that on Wikipedia?
I apologise if anyone felt it was flamebait, or overly personal.
Ah, the classic non-apology. "I apologize if you were offended". Not "I apologize for doing something offensive".
I felt it touched on a very important fact, the views on policy presented publically by a newly appointed arbiter.
Except for the fact that I have presented any views on policy. And I'm done feeding for today.
Jay.
From: "JAY JG" jayjg@hotmail.com
Except for the fact that I have presented any views on policy.
Have *not* presented any views on policy.
Jay.
From: steve v vertigosteve@yahoo.com
Jay has yet to give Michael a straight answer on the specific block issue.
It baffles me as to why anyone would think I owe them an answer on that, seeing as I had nothing to do with blocking the user. However, if you're interested in my viewpoint on the blocking, you can re-read my August 23, 2005 5:12:50 PM e-mail to this list.
Jays claim that the use of an ancient ethnic name as provokational is really very one-sided and has little substance,
No doubt, since I never made that claim. I merely pointed out the background of the name, and why the user chose it.
Jay.