I'm not the one who used the words "smarmy" and "condescending".
In response to Steve, the class system here is similar to that on Wikipedia - if you are not a list admin, what you think of people has little impact, while if you are, you can place them on moderation if you feel they are "smarmy and condescending" enough that they should not be tolerated.
Mark
On 09/03/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/9/07, Steve subsume@gmail.com wrote:
Of course you don't. The fact that continue it is equally pitiful.
Please elaborate on your class-system idea of this list. I'm sure its very fascinating.
-S
On 3/9/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think it was inappropriate. That's what matters here - what I think, and what the list admins think.
Mark
On 09/03/07, Steve subsume@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, sure. I also think administrative skepticism is > always < neccessary, regardless of the tally of charges. Demonization is always a very useful tool against people who have done something wrong, and is a very effective marginalizer.
Your initial smarmy, condescending rant was totally inappropriate, and I was glad that George Herbert followed it up with a measured description of the problem.
-S
On 3/9/07, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
It becomes an issue when somebody espouses racism in every post and uses it to personally attack others. "You guys won't listen to me because you must all be Koreans", for example.
Mark
On 08/03/07, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
Mark Williamson wrote:
> Because you are a racist :-) You probably even deny the indigenous > status of the Ainu.
I would hope that's not the reason... if we were to block people for holding objectionable opinions (even exceedingly objectionable ones), I could submit a very long list of names of people to be blocked, including many admins!
-Mark
Please stop trolling Mark here...
The reasons that our Asian user was removed from the list have been explained. That some of the unblock-en-l participants have also vented that they don't like him is perhaps not the single most focused calm response, but neither do they reflect a generic list intolerance for minority opinions.
We didn't remove them from the list because they're personally distasteful; we removed him from the list because he's abusive and he absolutely should not still be seeing anyone else's unblock request filings.
Had this been an official policy or position statement, it would also have been inappropriate for Mark to mention that here. But it was just an informational response to queries.
I think it's unreasonable to expect us not to form personal opinions regarding some of the unblock-en-l complaintants. It's reasonable for the community to insist that we still deal with them professionally, and I think we're doing that.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l