On Aug 19, 2006, at 3:24 PM, David Gerard wrote:
On 19/08/06, Dabljuh <dabljuh(a)gmx.net> wrote:
Funny enough, Talking about people is forbidden
by process.
WP:NPA, WP:Civil, WP:AGF those policies prevent you from even
thinking loudly that "Greg fucked up" and force you to pretend
every screwball with a POV is a perfectly decent person with
a great, encompassing understanding of not only the subject but
also the whole concept of collaborative writing.
Bollocks it does. This fallacious view seems to be held by many on AFD
- where saying someone's deletion nomination was completely
wrongheaded, misguided and stupid will get some idiot claiming that
you have "assumed bad faith" of the nominator. No, I've assumed bad
*judgement*, with the nomination as the evidence.
Speaking of which, did we ever change the capsule summary on AGF to
"Never assume malice when brain-searing idiocy will suffice?"
Best,
Phil Sandifer
sandifer(a)english.ufl.edu
You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a
boarded front door. There is a small mailbox here.