On 9/13/07, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/13/07, WikipediaEditor Durin wikidurin@gmail.com wrote:
I think you fail to understand that consensus can not override that Wikipedia is not a fair use encyclopedia. It is a free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry you do not seem to understand this.
...well, I'm extremely sorry you feel this inflexibly about it. This issue seems to have been the last straw that drove you to separate yourself from the project, and other than this particular issue, your contributions are sorely missed.
And again you've mis-characterized my stance.
I believe I speak for the new consensus, though, and that it extends
up to at least informal agreement at all levels. This has been rather unfortunately divisive, but it is important.
And fundamentally wrong. The "new consensus" you speak of would have Wikipedia not be a free content encyclopedia. If you don't want a free content encyclopedia, you are invited to apply for a job at Britannica. :)
That a consensus would agree that everyone should jump of a cliff doesn't make that consensus right. There are fundamental issues at stake here.
Your communications before, during, and after your departure match the
type and tenor of the burned-out-senior-admin (which we have unfortunately had enough to recognize well, by now).
Non-sequitur, since I've not been an admin for more than half a year. Whether it matches or not is irrelevant.