On 10 Nov 2007 at 09:07:22 +0000, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 21:07:46 -0500, "Daniel R. Tobias" dan@tobias.name wrote:
But it's a sign to me of one of the things wrong with Wikipedia's culture now that rather than deal with the substantive issues raised in the page, the first reaction of at least one prominent Wikipedian is to assume it's a past banned user and reach for the "banhammer".
And that's a sign to me that you never dealt with Jon Awbrey. Oh, but wait, you know him, don't you? He's a fellow WR poster.
Dealt with him on both sites... fought with him on both sites... found his style highly annoying on both sites. Been there, done that. Still object on principle to the mindset of dismissing entire categories of ideas because they can be associated in an ad-hominem way with somebody who acted annoying enough about them that they got themselves banned.
On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 07:26:25 -0500, "Daniel R. Tobias" dan@tobias.name wrote:
Dealt with him on both sites... fought with him on both sites... found his style highly annoying on both sites. Been there, done that. Still object on principle to the mindset of dismissing entire categories of ideas because they can be associated in an ad-hominem way with somebody who acted annoying enough about them that they got themselves banned.
In which case, I think you misunderstood my comment, which was: this looks like Awbrey, oh bugger it, I have yet more investigation of Awbrey to do, I wish he'd just go away and leave us alone.
Not sure if you noticed, but we just indefinitely blocked yet *another* Awbrey sock, last night.
Guy (JzG)