[WikiEN-l] A minor point

[steve v]

Your qualifier of "not typically" is understood to
mean: "yes, there are probably some." The point is
that the ideologies arent so different to make them
exclusive -- and in fact they are quite similar when
you get down to it. Sure its infeasible to block all
bigots, but the basis for the recent argument was
claimed to have been in principle --not feasibility.
Its easy to play "whack a mole" when one limits
oneself to whacking just one color of mole.

Hence the apparent new [[Wikipedia:Preemptive blocking
policy]] should have an equitable application clause.
We dont usually label users of militarist-dehumanist
terms (ie. "enemy", "insurgents," and "terrorists") as
"trolls," and yet from an NPOV these terms are simply
disguises for a deeper undercurrent of shallow
bigotry.
Equitable application of the "preemptive blocking
principle" would require that any use of dehumanizing
terms be treated as being based in ethnic bigotry. 

IAC, "preemptively" blocking anyone smells more like a
lack of trust in WP's normal dispute resolution or a
plain compromise of our own basic ethics than
something to cheer on.

SV

--- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:

> There is a problem with this. A conservative white
> Republican would  
> not typically have the racist ideas this troll is
> said to support.
> 
> Fred

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com