steven l. rubenstein wrote:
But I have to respond to Timwi’s message at length. His very statements actually exemplify the reason I have made this proposal. To be clear, although I certainly do believe in the specifics of the proposal, my main motivation was concern over people’s understanding of our NPOV policy. I wanted to open up a debate about NPOV, and raise people’s consciousness about NPOV. As far as I am concerned, what Timwi wrote proves that he either does not understand, or does not accept, our NPOV policy, and by itself justifies my proposal.
Well, that's fresh, especially considering that I
* didn't argue about or even mention the NPOV policy; * didn't accept or reject your proposal; * don't care what you or anyone think about the NPOV policy; * notice that several people have tried to point out to you that what you are advocating here hasn't really anything to do with NPOV.
All I said in my message was that the discussion is stupid.
I think we should have a Dumbest Discussion of the Week award. Or Deadest Horse of the Week. Or whatever.
Timwi