[WikiEN-l] Harassment sites

[Marc Riddell]

>>>> David Gerard wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> Not all, but certainly those whose skin is so very sensitive that they
>>>>> insist that removing michaelmoore.com from [[Michael Moore]] as an
>>>>> "attack site" is a necessary move.
>>>>> You keep trying to reduce this to binary choices. Doing so has already
>>>>> led to blithering idiocy (e.g. on your part with removing the Making
>>>>> Light links). Perhaps you need to stop trying to reduce it to binary
>>>>> choices.
>>> 
On 17/10/2007, Will Beback <will.beback.1 at gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> Let's not engage in uncivil language with each other while we're
>>>> discussing harassment.
>>> 
>> on 10/17/07 1:20 PM, David Gerard at dgerard at gmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>> It's hardly "uncivil language" to note that you come to this
>>> discussion with unclean hands.

On 10/17/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>> 
>> David, you seem to have a fondness for using the word "idiot" or its
>> variations when responding or referring to another person. This language is
>> uncivil, and, once again, sets a poor example.
>> 
>> Marc Riddell
> 
on 10/18/07 12:08 AM, George Herbert at george.herbert at gmail.com wrote:

> Let me spin this a bit differently, even...
> 
> That sort of language puts people on the defensive (or offensive).
> 
> If the objective was to convince Will that he made a mistake, putting
> him on the defensive by offending at him doesn't accomplish the goal.
> Defensive people hunker down (or, go offensive back), as a general
> rule.
> 
> It's counterproductive in discussions to use language like that,
> because it solidifies disagreeing opinions rather than opens people up
> to introspective self-criticism and behavior changes.
> 
Excellent points, George.

This is to David. This is not the first time your choice of language has
been questioned on this List; and each time you have chosen to ignore the
feedback. Why?

Marc Riddell