---- Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Fri, 5 May 2006 10:58:15 -0600, you wrote:
There is a bit of talking by one another here.
Reasoned polite
advocacy of policy positions is welcomed. Tendentious biased editing
(especially when you are working in a group) is not. However, there
are numerous situations where which is occurring is not immediately
clear. Often the touchstone is that the nasty behavior goes on and on
and on and on and on and at some point you realize you are engaging
in deliberate behavior calculated to subvert neutral point of view
(or in some other way create some tendency which simply doesn't
belong in a reference work.
Yes, I suspect we are in violent agreement. It probably comes down to
how one understands advocacy: I understand it as a point of view
forcefully put, whereas on Wikipedia I rather prefer a case simply
stated and consensus sought. But there is more than one shade of the
colour advocado.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG Good Afternoon Guy,
I had fully intended to
just come to this address today and delete anything that came from Wikipedia, due to the
way I was treated last night. Are those people administration, or are they just faking
it? If they are supposed to be behaving professionally , they sure did not do so last
night. Ask Phil and Mark what happened. I saved their emails if your are interested in
the disgusting way they are representing your enterprise. I am only here for my love and
devotion for the english language and writing. I want to be able to help people who need
advice. I did not come online last night to get in a word-fight with a couple of
ignorant, mean men who had absolutely no idea of who and what they were dealing with.
-Julie Harding____________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l