May I know exactly what behaviour you are referring to?
http://hy.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hayk http://ka.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Sopho&curid=841&...
Is it perhaps http://fj.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&diff=0&oldid=14... ?
Can I please see a specific policy page that says there's something wrong with that? See other Wikipedias that do similar things for example http://lv.wikipedia.org/ http://mn.wikipedia.org/ http://zh.wikipedia.org/ If you want to see it with an inactive Wikipedia, try http://iu.wikipedia.org/
I have been accused repeatedly of posting "badly translated text" to various Wikipedias, and I would like to say that the people who have been making these claims don't even CLAIM to be able to speak the languages in question and I assure you the text is not "badly translated".
As far as being fluent in other languages, 英語だけで話せます ；P･･･NOT 自分は、少数言語が話せますが、英語を話すことができなくては明白ですね。
将来には、こんなに攻撃しなくてください。
うちなーぐちんはなやびらんなー；ｐ
لا أتكلم ألإنجليزية
seriously though, what is wrong with knowing a few languages fluently and knowing a few phrases in many others?
Mark
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales jwales@wikia.com Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 07:26:10 -0800 Subject: Banned from editing except on en To: Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com Cc: Angela beesley@gmail.com, anthere9@yahoo.com
As a courtesy to you, Mark, I'm not going to make a big public spectacle of this, but if you would like to take it public, please do so. I just see no reason at this juncture to put you through the embarassment of a public ban.
You are banned from editing at any wikipedia site other than en. I will make an adjustment to this if you can convince me that you are fluent in any other language. It is simply unacceptable for you to continue making edits to minor language wikis in the way that you have.
We could enforce this ban at a technical level if we had to, but you know how our system works enough to see that it would be quite a lot of work for us. I don't think I've seen enough evidence of bad faith on your part to think that you'd do that.
--Jimbo
You are banned from editing at any wikipedia site other than en.
Personally (and with all due respect to Jimbo), I'd prefer that judgement be left to individual Wikipedias to decide, per their usual policy of banning users.
Specifically, I personally wouldn't mind if Mark edit on zh-min-nan. Evidence suggests that he is not a fluent speaker or writer of Southern Min by any measure, but at the same time he has also shown some willingness to learn. That willingness may well just be curiosity or dabbling, but those tendencies are not themselves evil. Regardless of his ultimate attainment in proficiency (if any), a degree of "language exploration" might even be encouraged. In practice this could mean devoting more community resources to correcting the learner's sentences, but so long as the errors are made in good faith and not meant to disrupt, they will be corrected in the usual wiki way.
Of course, if Mark were to engage in spamming (on zh-min-nan) or other actions based on bad faith, he'd become a candidate for censure, including the possibility of banning. Until and unless that occurs on zh-min-nan, I'd personally not mind participation from him (or anyone).
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales jwales@wikia.com Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 07:26:10 -0800 Subject: Banned from editing except on en To: Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com Cc: Angela beesley@gmail.com, anthere9-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org
As a courtesy to you, Mark, I'm not going to make a big public spectacle of this, but if you would like to take it public, please do so. I just see no reason at this juncture to put you through the embarassment of a public ban.
You are banned from editing at any wikipedia site other than en. I will make an adjustment to this if you can convince me that you are fluent in any other language. It is simply unacceptable for you to continue making edits to minor language wikis in the way that you have.
We could enforce this ban at a technical level if we had to, but you know how our system works enough to see that it would be quite a lot of work for us. I don't think I've seen enough evidence of bad faith on your part to think that you'd do that.
--Jimbo
Henry H. Tan-Tenn wrote:
You are banned from editing at any wikipedia site other than en.
Personally (and with all due respect to Jimbo), I'd prefer that judgement be left to individual Wikipedias to decide, per their usual policy of banning users.
The problem is: he has been making annoying edits on wikipedias that do not have any current users. He removed all the interlanguage links from one, and replaced the standard boilerplate text with his own message and email address. When Angela fixed this, he reverted her.
This is just one example of an ongoing pattern of difficult behavior.
He is one of the main factors forcing us to pursue a policy locking or closing small wikis, which is of course ironic, since he is an activist for small language wikis.
He and I had a partly constructive dialogue about these issues earlier today in IRC, and I am hopeful that some compromise can be worked out.
I admire his energy and enthusiasm, and I find him to be very bright. But there have been several incidents that are just problematic to say the least (look up the unresolved issue of sockpuppets for example), and his hostility and personal attacks against people who are highly respected in the community don't help at all.
I took this action at a global level rather than at an individual project level, because that's where the problem has arisen.
If you want him to be able to edit at zh-min-nan, then that is enough for me. He can do that. If anyone wants to vouch for him anywhere else (in an active project), email me and it will be done.
--Jimbo
Hi, Jimbo,
You are quite right that the inactive Wikipedias are not being cared for, except by some dedicated Wikipedian admins from the outside. So if indeed someone has been a troublemaker (i.e. editing in bad faith) on those inactive WPs, he or she should be judged accordingly, and I think you and others have the trust of the larger community to make such a decision. But again, I am not comfortable with the idea of a global ban (except en:). I think each of the active WPs should consider the record in the context of actual edits performed in each edition. That is, assume he or she is on a "white list" for all WPs, and only ban him/her _locally_ for violating specific community policies (which could well differ). It could mean that a persistent editor would need to be banned by and from all WPs, one by one, but so be it. (It maybe enough, IMO, that all the WPs be notified that so-and-so is believed to have edited in bad faith on one or more WP, and leave it at that.)
It was along this line that I proposed to remove Mark from a wide "black list" as regards zh-min-nan (to be confirmed or rejected by other editors there, of course). In that sense I was "vouching" for Mark, and only in that sense (given my limited attempt to follow the discussion).
Anyway, I hope things work out for all.
~~~~
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales ti 2004/11/15 EP 04:44 sia-kong:
Henry H. Tan-Tenn wrote:
You are banned from editing at any wikipedia site other than en.
Personally (and with all due respect to Jimbo), I'd prefer that judgement be left to individual Wikipedias to decide, per their usual policy of banning users.
The problem is: he has been making annoying edits on wikipedias that do not have any current users. He removed all the interlanguage links from one, and replaced the standard boilerplate text with his own message and email address. When Angela fixed this, he reverted her.
This is just one example of an ongoing pattern of difficult behavior.
He is one of the main factors forcing us to pursue a policy locking or closing small wikis, which is of course ironic, since he is an activist for small language wikis.
He and I had a partly constructive dialogue about these issues earlier today in IRC, and I am hopeful that some compromise can be worked out.
I admire his energy and enthusiasm, and I find him to be very bright. But there have been several incidents that are just problematic to say the least (look up the unresolved issue of sockpuppets for example), and his hostility and personal attacks against people who are highly respected in the community don't help at all.
I took this action at a global level rather than at an individual project level, because that's where the problem has arisen.
If you want him to be able to edit at zh-min-nan, then that is enough for me. He can do that. If anyone wants to vouch for him anywhere else (in an active project), email me and it will be done.
--Jimbo
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:44:04 -0800, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Henry H. Tan-Tenn wrote:
You are banned from editing at any wikipedia site other than en.
Personally (and with all due respect to Jimbo), I'd prefer that judgement be left to individual Wikipedias to decide, per their usual policy of banning users.
The problem is: he has been making annoying edits on wikipedias that do not have any current users. He removed all the interlanguage links from one, and replaced the standard boilerplate text with his own message and email address. When Angela fixed this, he reverted her.
"annoying edits" are not grounds for banning on ANY Wikipedia. Do they violate policy? Not that I can see. Do they disrupt the workings? Hah! There are no workings. Replacing boilerplate text in English with text in the target language may be annoying to YOU, but to speakers of that language it is more likely to be seen as a gesture which seeks to invite them to participate and make them more comfortable.
As I noted before, I am not 100% sure of the things I wrote in articles on bo: or sq: (but I didn't write hundreds of articles, and I know they're at least not totally gibberish), but unless I note otherwise for any other text I post, I do not have any doubt that it is 100% correct (unless it's not grammatically, in which case I can easily do some fact-checking before posting)
Perhaps we should show these people the edit you are talking about? http://fj.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&oldid=1459
As you can clearly see, compared to the version that was there previously, it is preferrable because there is actually content IN THE TARGET LANGUAGE (if you wish to assert it is somehow incorrect, I would respectfully request that you confirm that beforehand with a professional translator or areal linguist unless you claim to speak the language yourself and can offer an explanation or correction)
If you found the removal of interwiki links (which wasn't intentional - I just removed all existing text and replaced it with Fijian content, not intending to remove interwiki links) to be a problem, yet rather than fixing it you complained instead, perhaps you need to review the basic principles of Wikipedia: you can fix anything somebody else messes up.
In fact, NOBODY tried to change anything on the page except to add the article count, which I did not revert.
In fact, I WAS THE ONE TO ADD THE BOILERPLATE TEXT AND INTERWIKI LINKS BACK because Jimbo was pissed.
However Angela did indeed revert a contribution on another Wikipedia, although in that case it did not contain my e-mail address (and again, how is the e-mail address against policy? quite a few Wikipedias, including inactive ones, do that already). Since she simply specified in the edit summary that it was "vandalism", I reverted her edits with an edit summary "isibusi vandalism" - she had removed legitimate, target-language content and replaced it with content in English.
Clearly, the Wikipedian thing to do if you're irritated over the fact that somebody has removed the interwiki links in a page is to re-add them, rather then revert completely, and if it occurs again *and* it turns out to be an established user from another Wikipedia, rather than looking to ban that user from that project you should make a note on the talkpage.
As you can well see, now the mainpage at http://ve.wikipedia.org/ has now had the links added AS WELL AS a bit of Tshivenda text, with an internal link to an article in Venda (currently the only article).
If the article is deleted and the mainpage is reverted NOW, the only possible explanation would be that people don't like Venda, and for this reason I don't think it will happen.
This is just one example of an ongoing pattern of difficult behavior.
An "ongoing pattern of difficult behaviour"? Let's see, other than that what did I do?
I have been accused of:
1. Terrorising the Kashmiri Wikipedia with one sockpuppet, then using another sockpuppet to reconcile and gain adminship, then the day after I got in trouble, registering a gazillion more sockpuppets. Supposedly all these users have the same IPs and passwords as me, but I still highly doubt that.
2. Replacing almost every single article on the Toki Pona Wikipedia with a copyvio notice. This has already been discussed extensively, and unlike #1 on this list, I actually did do it.
3. Adding en: to a list of inactive Wikis, reverting its removal by an anon (note, an anon) twice, and then reverting its removal by Danny once. It may have been a "silly game", but nevertheless the reasons I gave for its presence on the list make perfect sense. I was subsequently banned from all projects (for 24 hours according to Danny, however it was actually a few hours more) against policy by Danny (when I asked him what he did wrong, he actually said "you tell me" and refused to tell what I had done wrong OR cite policy).
4. Helping small Wikipedias with various tasks, for example small cleanup tasks, removing vandalism and spam, etc.
5. Translating "directory" content for the mainpages of a few dead or inactive Wikipedias.
6. Creating logos for a number of Wikipedias, in some cases on request but in others I actually seeked out somebody from the Wikipedia and told them the service was available.
7. Trying to raise awareness of the inactive Wikipedia projects among their language communities via e-mail, postings in forums, and instant messaging (so far no phonecalls or snailmail), with a very low response rate.
I don't see how this amounts to an "ongoing pattern of difficult behavior" unless you just plain hate me and think everything I do is "difficult", although I'm pretty sure that isn't the case.
He is one of the main factors forcing us to pursue a policy locking or closing small wikis, which is of course ironic, since he is an activist for small language wikis.
The two actions which you cited actually occured AFTER such actions had reached their climax, and were in fact almost solely because of what you were doing.
He and I had a partly constructive dialogue about these issues earlier today in IRC, and I am hopeful that some compromise can be worked out.
I admire his energy and enthusiasm, and I find him to be very bright. But there have been several incidents that are just problematic to say the least (look up the unresolved issue of sockpuppets for example), and his hostility and personal attacks against people who are highly respected in the community don't help at all.
I have been attacked privately by more than one "highly respected" community member. What this says to me is that they are more cowardly.
I took this action at a global level rather than at an individual project level, because that's where the problem has arisen.
Again, I think this is more of a perceived problem than an actual one.
If you want him to be able to edit at zh-min-nan, then that is enough for me. He can do that. If anyone wants to vouch for him anywhere else (in an active project), email me and it will be done.
Oh, I can vouch for myself on all projects except tokipona:. :p In addition I have recently made numerous edits to a few non-English Wikipedias where I wrote original content or made significant changes.
I find it quite upsetting that with each language I want to edit, somehow this amounts to a claim that I speak the language.
I claim only to speak English and Other.
Mark
I'd rather not discuss this on the mailing list since I'm not convinced the exact details of Mark's problematic edits are relevant to the wider Wikipedia community so I have instead replied at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Node_ue#Re:Wikipedia-l:_Banned_from_e...
Angela.
"annoying edits" are not grounds for banning on ANY Wikipedia. Do they violate policy? Not that I can see. Do they disrupt the workings? Hah! There are no workings.
Yes, it does disrupt the workings. Removing links to the pages that new users need to read to find out what Wikipedia is and how they can help are vital to the main page before a project has any users.
But locking a Wikipedia doesn't disrupt the workings? As I noted before, the removal of interlanguage links was purely unintentional.
Replacing boilerplate text in English with text in the target language may be annoying to YOU, but to speakers of that language it is more likely to be seen as a gesture which seeks to invite them to participate and make them more comfortable.
The "text in the target language" is only any use if it makes sense in that language. You admitted you don't speak these languages so how do you know it makes sense? The text also needs to be relevant to Wikipedia. Adding a paragraph about the National Language Services that you copied directly from some website and removing all Wikipedia-related content is not helpful to those who speak the language.
1. It does make sense in these languages.
2. When on earth did I admit I don't speak these languages?
3. It's more helpful than a paragraph of what might as well be a bunch of squiggles.
The [http://ve.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&diff=2&oldid=1 Venda Main Page] is copied directly from [http://www.cyberserv.co.za/users/~jako/lang/ventexts.htm].
No, it's not. It's copied from http://www.dac.gov.za/about_us/cd_nat_language/national_lang_service/nationa...
As I noted before, I am not 100% sure of the things I wrote in articles on bo: or sq: (but I didn't write hundreds of articles, and I know they're at least not totally gibberish), but unless I note otherwise for any other text I post, I do not have any doubt that it is 100% correct (unless it's not grammatically, in which case I can easily do some fact-checking before posting)
You were asked to stop doing this on [[sq:]] by at least one of the users there who is fluent in Albanian. Does this not tell you something about the appropriateness of your edits?
Hmm. Let's see. If you'll read the logs of the chat, Dori apparently agreed with the rationale and the only reason he asked me to stop was a fear that I was going to create a lot when in fact I only created a few.
Does this not tell you something about your incompetence when it comes to individual incidents?
Perhaps we should show these people the edit you are talking about? http://fj.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&oldid=1459
As you can clearly see, compared to the version that was there previously, it is preferrable because there is actually content IN THE TARGET LANGUAGE (if you wish to assert it is somehow incorrect, I would respectfully request that you confirm that beforehand with a professional translator or areal linguist unless you claim to speak the language yourself and can offer an explanation or correction)
Firstly, I did check with a user who knows Fijian. Secondly, directing users to your email address when you don't speak the language isn't going to help them.
Oh? Who might that be? And what did they tell you it means? Because if it has you so upset (don't say "I'm not upset" because you are), I would be glad to work things out with them and inevitably it would either come out that they speak some Fijian from an alternate universe, or they told you what it means in real Fijian and you got upset about it for no particular reason.
And if we have a Fijian-speaking user, why on earth did we have not even a shred of content in Fijian? Other Wikipedias where we have users but they're not interested at least have a short paragraph in the target language either welcoming them, telling them waht Wikipedia is, inviting them to contribute, etc...
However Angela did indeed revert a contribution on another Wikipedia... Since she simply specified in the edit summary that it was "vandalism", I reverted her edits with an edit summary "isibusi vandalism" - she had removed legitimate, target-language content and replaced it with content in English.
[http://ve.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&diff=4&oldid=3 This diff] is presumably what you are talking about. In what way was this content legitimate? Being in the right language is not enough if that content says nothing about Wikipedia.
"Wikipedia Tshivenda" is clearly about Wikipedia. Or do you have word from some phantom Venda-speaking user that Wikipedia is Venda for "three-eared flying monkeys"?
Similarly, removing everything useful and replacing it with a few odd words you picked up in a language is not helpful ([http://kj.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Main_Page&oldid=2 kj: example])
Hmm, and how do you know what that says? You know Kwanyama? In that case, I'm sure we can discuss this and we'll reach a conclusion that either we are talking about a different "Kwanyama", or, well, you won't really be able to speak it at all because it's not "a few odd words" I picked up in the language. Or is it that you've asked a Kwanyama-speaking user?
If the article is deleted and the mainpage is reverted NOW, the only possible explanation would be that people don't like Venda, and for this reason I don't think it will happen.
Don't like Venda or don't like potential copyright problems? Do you have permission from the author of [[te:Tshumelo ya Nyambo dza Lushaka]] to release it under the GFDL?
There is no article at http://te.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tshumelo_ya_Nyambo_dza_Lushaka because that title is in the Venda language in the Roman alphabet rather than the Telugu language in the Telugu abugida.
But if you meant the article at ve: (Remember, it's Venda, not Tenda, and it's Telugu and not Velugu), well, there is no copyright issue because, being produced by the government itself, there IS no copyright.
This can easily be inferred by 1. going to the page you earlier claimed I copied teh text from and 2. noticing that the other text in Venda cites a source and bears a notice that permission was given by the publishing house, whereas the NLS one says nothing, as it was written originally by the government, for the people and has never been distributed for profit.
After your behaviour in trying to remove alleged copyright violations from toki pona, edits such as [http://tn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tirelo_ya_Dipuo_tsa_Boset%C5%A1haba this on tn:] appear quite surprising. Do you have permission to use this text? Or are you happy to contribute copyright violations as long as they are "in the target language"?
I am not happy to contribute copyright violations in any language. Well, I am, but it's illegal and it might hurt Wikipedia, so I wouldn't.
After people accused me of being stupid (and that's just one "respected community member". not you though; I'd not expect you to say that) for my lack of knowledge of copyright law and Wikipedia policy and the fact that I did not get the correct answer from a cursory Google for answers, I find it quite ironic that you are accusing me of a copyvio in even more unquestionable situations. Whether or not languages are copyrightable has been decided in court, and not internationally, and at the time at least (not sure about now) the official Toki Pona website had a copyright notice which was ambiguous in that it could be interpreted to mean that the site was copyrighted OR that the language was copyrighted, and there was no sort of document whereby Ms Kisa released it under the terms of the GFDL... but the sort of material I posted is public domain, no questions asked, and was at no time copyrighted, which should have been apparent after a cursory Google search where you looked at the first 5 or 7 results, as I did viz Toki Pona.
Mark
"88 885 489 8@172 5 887280828 08789208, 42 8926807 082808@ 880 187 8 482... 8 482... 589897, 11292 81 8@08?"
On 16 Nov 2004, at 06:17, Mark Williamson wrote:
Does this not tell you something about your incompetence when it comes to individual incidents?
If I was Angela, I'd ask you to apologize.
Does it ever occur to you that you can't bully people into welcoming your company?
-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]] www.ropersonline.com
"Or are you happy to contribute copyright violations as long as they are 'in the target language'?"
If I were me, I'd ask Angela to apologise if she asked me to apologise.
Mark
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:34:52 +0100, Jens Ropers ropers@ropersonline.com wrote:
On 16 Nov 2004, at 06:17, Mark Williamson wrote:
Does this not tell you something about your incompetence when it comes to individual incidents?
If I was Angela, I'd ask you to apologize.
Does it ever occur to you that you can't bully people into welcoming your company?
-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]] www.ropersonline.com
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:58:37 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
"Or are you happy to contribute copyright violations as long as they are 'in the target language'?"
If I were me, I'd ask Angela to apologise if she asked me to apologise.
I think that's a quite reasonable thing to ask. You took a text from a website, and put it on Wikipedia. In my book that's a copyright violation. Your argument that it was a government website does not hold water - US government publications are free of copyright, but other countries have other rules. In general, it is a bad thing to take texts from other sites unless they specifically state that they are not under copyright.
Andre Engels
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:55:24 +0100, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:58:37 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
"Or are you happy to contribute copyright violations as long as they are 'in the target language'?"
If I were me, I'd ask Angela to apologise if she asked me to apologise.
I think that's a quite reasonable thing to ask. You took a text from a website, and put it on Wikipedia. In my book that's a copyright violation. Your argument that it was a government website does not hold water - US government publications are free of copyright, but other countries have other rules. In general, it is a bad thing to take texts from other sites unless they specifically state that they are not under copyright.
It's not what she asked, it's the way she asked it. Had I said the same thing in the reverse situation, you would probably be telling me I should apologise to her.
And how do you know I haven't checked the copyright laws that are applicable in this case? Also, since another site based in that country similarly used them without any attribution but attributed all other works to their respective authors and sometimes gave copyright and permission notices, I think that, given the multitude of sources used by that site, it is not unreasonable to trust their judgement especially when added to the facts: It was published by a governmental organisation and was not sold but rather distributed freely. Also, if you take into account the social and political tendencies of the government in question, there is quite a different conclusion than for countries which are highly protective of government works. There is no royalty (one common reason for such measures), there is no totalitarian regime (another reason), and their economic views would not generally support such laws.
If you want to tell me that it *is* illegal and show me your sources, I will be happy to put copyvio notices up myself.
Mark
Mark Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:55:24 +0100, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:58:37 -0700, Mark Williamson node.ue@gmail.com wrote:
"Or are you happy to contribute copyright violations as long as they are 'in the target language'?"
If I were me, I'd ask Angela to apologise if she asked me to apologise.
I think that's a quite reasonable thing to ask. You took a text from a website, and put it on Wikipedia. In my book that's a copyright violation. Your argument that it was a government website does not hold water - US government publications are free of copyright, but other countries have other rules. In general, it is a bad thing to take texts from other sites unless they specifically state that they are not under copyright.
It's not what she asked, it's the way she asked it. Had I said the same thing in the reverse situation, you would probably be telling me I should apologise to her.
And how do you know I haven't checked the copyright laws that are applicable in this case? Also, since another site based in that country similarly used them without any attribution but attributed all other works to their respective authors and sometimes gave copyright and permission notices, I think that, given the multitude of sources used by that site, it is not unreasonable to trust their judgement especially when added to the facts: It was published by a governmental organisation and was not sold but rather distributed freely. Also, if you take into account the social and political tendencies of the government in question, there is quite a different conclusion than for countries which are highly protective of government works. There is no royalty (one common reason for such measures), there is no totalitarian regime (another reason), and their economic views would not generally support such laws.
If you want to tell me that it *is* illegal and show me your sources, I will be happy to put copyvio notices up myself.
Mark
Mark, when dealing with copyrights, tread carefully and don't assume anything. If there is no explicit statement that the material is free from copyright, or otherwise free for use, most countries assume the material to be copyrighted and unusable without permission. "Another website used it" is a poor excuse, as that's similar to trying to justify a crime by saying other people commit crimes too.
John Lee ([[en:User:Johnleemk]])
And people want me to apologise for things *I* have said to "well-respected Wikipedians"? I am trying now to be less abrasive, but it is a bit more difficult than you might expect since well-respected Wikipedians continue to toss personal attacks at me as they did before.
(18/11/2004 [23:19:10]) <GerardM> do not be stupid (18/11/2004 [23:19:17]) <node_ue> Excuse me? (18/11/2004 [23:19:27]) <node_ue> Would you like me to paste this conversation on the mailinglist? (18/11/2004 [23:19:32]) <GerardM> it is a lame argument (18/11/2004 [23:19:44]) <node_ue> Would you like to explain that? (18/11/2004 [23:19:59]) <node_ue> Or are you going to just tell me my argument is lame like you did before, and then never tell me why? (18/11/2004 [23:20:25]) <GerardM> I do not have time at this moment, what is difficult about that ? (18/11/2004 [23:20:48]) <node_ue> Apparently you never have time, because you never explain it, yet you always tell me my arguments are lame. (18/11/2004 [23:21:18]) <node_ue> I think you have plenty of time, but you don't want to because you cannot support it, so you will just stand behind a rock and tell me how lame my argument is while you pretend to be too busy to have a rational discussion. (18/11/2004 [23:21:21]) <GerardM> I am working on stuff, and do not have the time to go on discussing things. We do not agree
And seriously, the last time we had a disagreement (that time it was over e-mail), he told me my arguments were all lame, and told me I had yet to explain my feelings about the issue when I had spent at least 2 very very very long non-hostile e-mails doing exactly that. When I asked him to explain *why* they were lame, he did not respond and thus our correspondence came to an end.
Mark
Mark Williamson wrote:
And people want me to apologise for things *I* have said to "well-respected Wikipedians"? I am trying now to be less abrasive, but it is a bit more difficult than you might expect since well-respected Wikipedians continue to toss personal attacks at me as they did before.
(18/11/2004 [23:19:10]) <GerardM> do not be stupid (18/11/2004 [23:19:17]) <node_ue> Excuse me? (18/11/2004 [23:19:27]) <node_ue> Would you like me to paste this conversation on the mailinglist? (18/11/2004 [23:19:32]) <GerardM> it is a lame argument (18/11/2004 [23:19:44]) <node_ue> Would you like to explain that? (18/11/2004 [23:19:59]) <node_ue> Or are you going to just tell me my argument is lame like you did before, and then never tell me why? (18/11/2004 [23:20:25]) <GerardM> I do not have time at this moment, what is difficult about that ? (18/11/2004 [23:20:48]) <node_ue> Apparently you never have time, because you never explain it, yet you always tell me my arguments are lame. (18/11/2004 [23:21:18]) <node_ue> I think you have plenty of time, but you don't want to because you cannot support it, so you will just stand behind a rock and tell me how lame my argument is while you pretend to be too busy to have a rational discussion. (18/11/2004 [23:21:21]) <GerardM> I am working on stuff, and do not have the time to go on discussing things. We do not agree
And seriously, the last time we had a disagreement (that time it was over e-mail), he told me my arguments were all lame, and told me I had yet to explain my feelings about the issue when I had spent at least 2 very very very long non-hostile e-mails doing exactly that. When I asked him to explain *why* they were lame, he did not respond and thus our correspondence came to an end.
Mark
Mark, If this is an example of you being less abrasive.. :( I answered some questions, then was working on some stuff, you started a private chat. This went on for some time, I told you I was busy. You did not like that, you said that I did not have an argument. I told you not to be stupid as I did not have the time.
Basically Mark, I did not have the time and you sure do not make friends making people do things when they do not have the time. You are a nuisance that way. You do not take no for an answer. You do not accept that people disagree with you.
De groeten, GerardM
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org