Hi folks,
I know we have a problem sometimes with badly chosen names (to put it mildly!). One I have heard some comment about is CRUCIFIEDCHRIST which I agree is in very bad taste, as it appears to mock the beliefs of many Wiki users. (Either that or it is someone with a Woodrow Wilson-style Christ complex!) It would be as unacceptable as if someone called themeselves BUSHWARMONGER, LAPDOG BLAIR or BELSEN. It is provocative, offensive to many and should be removed. Is there some procedure by which those in unsuitable names are asked to change them? I haven't seen CUMGUZZLER for a while. Maybe he has renamed, reformed or is living up to his name and so otherwise distracted. (Was it a he? I never checked!)
JT
_________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 05:58:21AM +0000, james duffy wrote:
I know we have a problem sometimes with badly chosen names (to put it mildly!). One I have heard some comment about is CRUCIFIEDCHRIST which I agree is in very bad taste, as it appears to mock the beliefs of many Wiki
I second that motion. Could someone please change that username.
Jonathan
On lun, 2003-01-27 at 21:58, james duffy wrote:
Hi folks,
I know we have a problem sometimes with badly chosen names (to put it mildly!). One I have heard some comment about is CRUCIFIEDCHRIST which I agree is in very bad taste, as it appears to mock the beliefs of many Wiki users. (Either that or it is someone with a Woodrow Wilson-style Christ complex!) It would be as unacceptable as if someone called themeselves BUSHWARMONGER, LAPDOG BLAIR or BELSEN. It is provocative, offensive to many and should be removed. Is there some procedure by which those in unsuitable names are asked to change them? I haven't seen CUMGUZZLER for a while. Maybe he has renamed, reformed or is living up to his name and so otherwise distracted. (Was it a he? I never checked!)
CG used a number of login names from the same IP, including this one. All things considered, I'd say it's a huge improvement.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:37:11PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
I know we have a problem sometimes with badly chosen names (to put it mildly!). One I have heard some comment about is CRUCIFIEDCHRIST which I
CG used a number of login names from the same IP, including this one. All things considered, I'd say it's a huge improvement.
Blasphemy is as offensive as lewdness. He is still trying to deliberately provoke and offend people; hardly what I would consider a "collegial spirit of mutual respect".
Jonathan
On lun, 2003-01-27 at 22:47, Jonathan Walther wrote:
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:37:11PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
CG used a number of login names from the same IP, including this one. All things considered, I'd say it's a huge improvement.
Blasphemy is as offensive as lewdness. He is still trying to deliberately provoke and offend people; hardly what I would consider a "collegial spirit of mutual respect".
The problem with these names is the disruption caused by other Wikipedians taking offense at them.
"Cumguzzler" received acrid complaints within hours and generated pages of screed *entirely from other people debating its lack of merits* within a couple days of its first appearence, while "CrucifiedChrist" has been used for almost two weeks *without a peep* from anyone until today.
In my book, that's a huge improvement. Now please stop feeding the trolls; we've got an encyclopedia to work on.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Neither are death threats, but you seem to approve of those. Zoe Jonathan Walther krooger@debian.org wrote:On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 10:37:11PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
I know we have a problem sometimes with badly chosen names (to put it mildly!). One I have heard some comment about is CRUCIFIEDCHRIST which I
CG used a number of login names from the same IP, including this one. All things considered, I'd say it's a huge improvement.
Blasphemy is as offensive as lewdness. He is still trying to deliberately provoke and offend people; hardly what I would consider a "collegial spirit of mutual respect".
Jonathan
I've decided to take a hardline on such names. Some will gripe that their freedom of speech is being restricted, but I think that's pretty silly. Wikipedia is not the right place to get your jollies by tweaking people. And if you have some political message you want to get across you can just write a biased article, ha ha.
(Seriously, my point is that wikipedia is not the place for such things. The user pages are pretty much laissez-faire, anyway.)
To be fair, if we're not going to allow CRUCIFIEDCHRIST, we probably can't allow a number of other polemical names, even ones that are not offensive to most people. For example 'GhandiIsGreat'.
I know we have a problem sometimes with badly chosen names (to put it mildly!). One I have heard some comment about is CRUCIFIEDCHRIST which I agree is in very bad taste, as it appears to mock the beliefs of many Wiki users. (Either that or it is someone with a Woodrow Wilson-style Christ complex!) It would be as unacceptable as if someone called themeselves BUSHWARMONGER, LAPDOG BLAIR or BELSEN.
Well, "Belsen" is a real name, in addition to being a concentration camp. So *if* someone has that name, for real, and if it was not intended to be political.
--Jimbo
On 1/28/03 8:24 AM, "Magnus Manske" magnus.manske@epost.de wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Well, "Belsen" is a real name, in addition to being a concentration camp. So *if* someone has that name, for real, and if it was not intended to be political.
Actually, the place is "Bergen-Belsen", AFAIK, so we could allow "Belsen".
This is getting a bit ridiculous.
The policy as it stands now says that even real names can be banned if other people find them offensive.
Tom Parmenter Ortolan88
|From: The Cunctator cunctator@kband.com |Sender: wikien-l-admin@wikipedia.org |Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org |Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:28:41 -0500 | |On 1/28/03 8:24 AM, "Magnus Manske" magnus.manske@epost.de wrote: | |> Jimmy Wales wrote: |> |>> Well, "Belsen" is a real name, in addition to being a concentration |>> camp. So *if* someone has that name, for real, and if it was not |>> intended to be political. |>> |>> |> Actually, the place is "Bergen-Belsen", AFAIK, so we could allow "Belsen". |> |This is getting a bit ridiculous. | |_______________________________________________ |WikiEN-l mailing list |WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org |http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |