On 12/4/06, dmehkeri(a)swi.com <dmehkeri(a)swi.com> wrote:
The second irony is that there is no list accessible
to you for discussing
sexism, and yet I can still hear you discuss it. Loud and clear. From three
lists over. Let's tone it down then, shall we?
It's not my problem if you can't tell a complaint from an attack.
I've criticised no person here, only an action. I've provided what I
hope to be a clear argument about why I think the action is
intolerable, and with Matt's help, I provided input on how to resolve
the matter. What else would you like from me?
As I stated before, It was already 'suggested' that a closed list
would be inapproiate. The suggestion was not followed. Obviously the
next step is condemnation of the act.
> In any case, the attacking tone this thread has
taken.. especially by
> those who are claiming to be attacked is especially troublesome. I
> was and am honestly afraid to post my thoughts as a result of it. I
> think you should take a step back and think about that before
> replying.
The difference here is by explicilty refusing access to a wikimedia
list to people on the basis of their gender creates an act of
prejudicial discrimination. No sane member of our community could deny
this obvious fact.
In the prior thread from which you quote me out of context, people
were being attacked and called sexist *merely* because they disagreed.
The exchange I commented on did not contain overt and indisputable
sexism.
It would be appropriate for you to throw my words at me if I were
attacking and calling someone a sexist when there was no clear
evidence of sexism on their part beyond disagreeing with me since that
is what I was lamenting in the prior thread.
It is not appropriate for you to recall those words when I am
complaining about a patently sexist act without regard for who
committed it or if they agree with me.