We are all beggars. No one can insist on a standard of fairness when
editing articles. You and I can only make a good faith edit and explain
it on the article's discussion page. If others aren't convinced, there's
little you or I can do about it.
While your account is blocked you can make editorial suggestions on your
user talk page. Please tell me your Wikipedia username, and I'll
dialogue further with you there.
(If you choose to reply only by private email, please use my Yahoo
address.
Ed Poor
Wikipedia
-----Original Message-----
From: megaknee(a)btopenworld.com [mailto:megaknee@btopenworld.com]
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 12:48 PM
To: Poor, Edmund W
Subject: what you wrote on wikipedia blocks
"Anyone who has 'trouble' following the rules should
get a standard
time-out for each violation, until they either
1. Get a clue, or
2. Choose to be elsewhere"
I saw this.It's not what happened to me, in getting
permanently kicked out on the argument that to claim
to be entitled to any standards of fairness instead of
always being a beggar for them as discretionary,
constituted "legal threats"! And this was done near
the expiry of a 2-day block for accused "link spam"
that was flagrantly biased because it wasn't put on
the other side of the argument concerned who were
repeatedly reinstating their link while I was trying
to achieve a neutral balance with it.
Both blocks had the effect of preventing me taking the
issue to RfC, or nominating a relevant VfD, after I
had been bullied by a group with personal attacks
started out of nowhere, sourced from a feud outside
Wikipedia, and an attitude that to call them unfair
proved them right! As can be read at talk:Asperger's
Syndrome, Aug 18-27.
Unless the blocks don't prevent there existing a
contest proceeding exists against them where this
evidence of bias can be presented and answered, that
evidences to the world that Wikipedia is corrupt. That
is not a "legal threat" because Wikipedia can't opt
out of the world! so has definite responsibilities
never to side with group bullying or stalking of any
user, no matter if it would be cynically expedient to.
Have you any user instructions on how, when
thwarted by exactly the indefinite block whose
abusiveness on bullies's side I'm seeking to
challenge, and whose open purpose is already to
prevent me making other challenges - how I can convey
this challenge on an official basis to the highest
levels of Wikipedia in the terms shown in this email.
If not, shouldn't you abandon Wikipedia, concluding
it does not match your own stated standards of
fairness and is corrupt?
I have set out all this both in Wikien-l and on my
user page. It's as simple as this:
The only way the NPOV policy genuinely exists and is
not a public lie, is if unconditionally anyone who
falls victim to crowd psychology can lay claim to by
right, not have to beg for by favour, any measure that
prevents a force of group numbers keeping a bullying
bias in place. Now, "laying claim to" anything,
inherently means being entitled to anything. This is
actually a case-study in how society emerged from the
Middle Ages. To have any credible claim to work by any
principles, a society must show they operate reliably fairly,
and to do that means that people are entitled to it. No way
out of that. Hence, as soon as any group tries to follow any
policy code like neutral POV, immediately people are entitled
to things and all things are not dependent on favour. So, it
stands absolutely logically proved:
either * it's wrong to say to any user ever "you're
not entitled to anything",
or * it's wrong to say to the public that Wikipedia
has a neutrality policy that works.
They can't both be right because anyone can see they
contradict each other head-on. At least one must be
wrong. Which is it? What this means is perfectly
clear. Unless Wikipedia can answer that, then
Wikipedia is illegal and I have uncovered the point
where its present structure makes it so.
___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos
http://uk.photos.yahoo.com