[WikiEN-l] Remarks about Danny's odd comments

[Robert]

This is in regards to the article on "Israelites".

Danny writes "I don't frequently post on this list, but I
do read it and have been following the discussions taking
place here. I am on the verge of getting into a major flame
war with RK. Rather than do that, I have decided to follow
Ed's example and leave Wikipedia for a while."

I am puzzled and astonished to read this. The flame war is
coming from Danny alone.

I have been trying to talk to him and work with him, but
Danny refuses to talkm literally. I have tried to make
peace with him, and have repeatedly requested that he
contribute to the article, instead of making personal
attacks. I have added new material, and explicitly asked
Danny to comment on this material, and offer any
constructive criticism he would like to. But Danny refuses
to contribute to any articles, and simply writes ad homenin
attacks.

For whatever reason, Danny simply fills the Talk pages with
implications that I am ignorant, he attacks the beliefs of
mainstream scholars, he refuses to clarify his statements,
and he makes unilateral deletions without explaining what
the problem is.

Worse, he also now claims that he, and apparently he alone,
has the right to decite what is NPOV, and has repeatedly
implied that the views of any scholar other than him are
not worth describing in the article And all this is despite
my repeated requests for conversation and discussion. These
remarks are still on the Talk page in the Israelite
article. 

Frankly, I am terribly confused. These recent actions by
Danny are not like him at all, and until two days ago we
had a good relationship! But after he saw just one sentence
he disapproved of (I said that Jews are descendents of the
Israelite tribe of Judah, and refugees from some of the
other tribes.) he begain fixated on some imaginary claims
that have to with "racial purity" or something, and never
let go of this idea.

Danny then refused to speak to anyone about the issue, and
simply implied that Jews were lying about their heritage.
Since this particular Biblical minimalist position is used
on the Internet by anti-Semitic groups on a daly basis, I
was extremely concerned, and I told him so. NO ONE ACCUSED
HIM of being an anti-Semited. Rather, I asked him to
clarify precisely what he meant. Yet instead of writing
clarifications, he made personal attacks.  (In later days
he did make some clarifications, but he still refuses to
bring forth any sources at all to back up his position.)

Ironically, the ONLY person on Wikipedia in recent days to
offer any support for Danny's claims has been ME. I went
out of my way to add material, in the article on the
"History of ancient Israel and Judah", on both Biblical
minimalism and Biblical maximalism, with sources,
bibliography and weblinks. Danny, mysteriously, refuses to
give any support for his own position.

Danny's most recent remarks about me are, to put it
charitably, incomprehensible. He attacked me by claiming
that I was writing nonsense, that literally every proposed
addition I had offered was wrong...and then  he admits that
almost every proposed change I made was, in fact, correct!
He then concludes that I am totally wrong. In a word,
"Huh?".

He has continually attacked me for beliefs that I don't
have, and keeps imagining that someone is trying to prove
that Jewish people are some sort of "racially pure" group,
whatever that means. Yet no one is making such a claim. And
its not just my point of view; other people have joined in
on the Talk pages, trying to explain this to Danny, but he
insists that his mis-reading of the material is correct.
I went through his comments one at a time, and explained to
him that he was attributing many beliefs to me that I don't
have, and that he was attacking claims that I was not
making. Further, I explained that some of his beliefs I
actually agreed with! Yet all he gave in return was
silence.

All of this disturbs me greatly, as this is not like Danny
at all. I just can't explain why he refuses to talk, why he
refuses to explain his position, why he refuses to back up
his own position, or why he is making up all sorts of
attacks on non-existent beliefs, and attacking me
personally. 

This is not right, folks. This is justplain wrong.

Robert (RK)



=====
"I prefer a wicked person who knows he is wicked, to a righteous person who knows he is righteous".
The Seer of Lublin [Jacob Isaac Ha-Hozeh Mi-Lublin, 1745-1815]

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com