| Revision as of 13:11, 5 August 2005 editAsbestos (talk | contribs)5,333 edits →Moving for a third time← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:48, 5 August 2005 edit undoKatefan0 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,081 edits →Moving for a third timeNext edit → | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
| Yeah, I'm going to stick with my objection. According to | Yeah, I'm going to stick with my objection. According to | ||
| "any speech questioning the intellectual honesty and moral principles of any person is considered illegitimate." (And ought to be removed) The purpose of Wikis' is not to question people's motives, it is to discuss and question ideas. (Think of how easy it will be to present this complaint to Arbcom.) ] | "any speech questioning the intellectual honesty and moral principles of any person is considered illegitimate." (And ought to be removed) The purpose of Wikis' is not to question people's motives, it is to discuss and question ideas. (Think of how easy it will be to present this complaint to Arbcom.) ] | ||
| ::I did nothing any worse or different than what you did by disclosing other peoples' conflicts of interest. After all, conflicts of interest must be disclosed, right? If you're trying to suggest that you're going to bring me before Arbcom for pointing out your own hypocrisy and concomitant whitewashing, all I can say is do what you feel you need to do, but please stop threatening me in the meantime. · ]<sup>]</sup> 14:48, August 5, 2005 (UTC) | |||
| :?!?!? Did you see my comment about hypocrisy above? And why do you need to keep copying Katefan0's text here? Is once not enough? — ] | ] 13:11, 5 August 2005 (UTC) | :?!?!? Did you see my comment about hypocrisy above? And why do you need to keep copying Katefan0's text here? Is once not enough? — ] | ] 13:11, 5 August 2005 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 14:48, 5 August 2005
Irrelevent Comments
- Observers might be equally interested to know that User:Benjamin Gatti has been involved in a dispute being mediated by Ed Poor (see Price-Anderson Act); this particular bit of disruption could be seen as a way to curry favor, were one so inclined. · Katefan0 21:22, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Please don't delete other users' comments. · Katefan0 21:25, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Observers might be equally interested to know that User:Benjamin Gatti has been involved in a dispute being mediated by Ed Poor (see Price-Anderson Act); this particular bit of disruption could be seen as a way to curry favor, were one so inclined. · Katefan0 21:22, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Katefan sees fit to staulk - I find the personal attack more closely related to another matter - so I've removed it to discussion,. If Katefan has a comment on the substance of the article - she is welcome to particpate. Benjamin Gatti
If you could, please show me how I have "staulked" you. Otherwise you may prefer to modify your remarks. Two in-common articles is hardly "stalking." I have a right to comment on a VfD just like everybody else. I'm sorry you didn't appreciate my words, but I felt like it was necessary since the discussion was already on the subject of potential conflicts of interest. Also, I never made a personal attack against you -- I never said you WERE currying favor, or that I thought you were currying favor, or anything approaching it -- I said it could have that appearance, which is far from a personal attack. On the other hand, capriciously painting comments you dislike as personal attacks can be construed as itself a personal attack, though I won't press this issue. I will, however, insist on my comments being left intact -- a stance at least one other editor seems to feel proper. · Katefan0 21:50, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
You have the right to comment on other pages without people impuning your motives without cause - and I think you should extend the same courtesy. Benjamin Gatti
- Did you extend me courtesy when you said I'm "stalking" you by participating in two of the same articles out of tens of thousands? How about when you called my pointing out something unflattering about you a "personal attack?" Or how about deleting my comments on a talk page three times? · Katefan0 05:21, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
- Benjamin, this seems to be unduly hypocritical. You commented on the VfD "...both of whom failed to disclose that they are engaged in an arbcom petition against Ed Poor - that is that they clearly Oppose the policy. ... items are being voted for deletion by vested parties as a means of censoring ideas with which they take exception". i.e. you "disclosed" something about two editors, impugning their motives for the VfD and the vote. You can hardly then tell Katefan0 that you have "the right to comment on other pages without people 'impuning' your motives" and disclosing equally (ir)relevant information about you, as this was precisely what you did in the first place. — Asbestos | Talk 12:53, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
Text move (Again)
Once Again Personal attacks are not a valid reason to delete a page. Whether or not one editor of several "could appear" to be harboring a bias (which way is disputed) is simply irrelevent to the question of whether or not the WikiSpace ought to include a particular entry. Benjamin Gatti
:::::Observers might be equally interested to know that User:Benjamin Gatti has been involved in a dispute being mediated by Ed Poor (see Price-Anderson Act); this particular bit of disruption could be seen as a way to curry favor, were one so inclined. And in the interest of my own full disclosure, I am also involved in this particular mediated dispute, which is why I have not voted on this particular VFD. · Katefan0 21:22, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Please don't delete other users' comments, Benjamin. · Katefan0 21:25, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Moving for a third time
:::::Observers might be equally interested to know that User:Benjamin Gatti has been involved in a dispute being mediated by Ed Poor (see Price-Anderson Act); this particular bit of disruption could be seen as a way to curry favor, were one so inclined. And in the interest of my own full disclosure, I am also involved in this particular mediated dispute, which is why I have not voted on this particular VFD. · Katefan0 21:22, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Please don't delete other users' comments, Benjamin. · Katefan0 21:25, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm going to stick with my objection. According to WhatIsIllegitimateSpeech "any speech questioning the intellectual honesty and moral principles of any person is considered illegitimate." (And ought to be removed) The purpose of Wikis' is not to question people's motives, it is to discuss and question ideas. (Think of how easy it will be to present this complaint to Arbcom.) Benjamin Gatti
- I did nothing any worse or different than what you did by disclosing other peoples' conflicts of interest. After all, conflicts of interest must be disclosed, right? If you're trying to suggest that you're going to bring me before Arbcom for pointing out your own hypocrisy and concomitant whitewashing, all I can say is do what you feel you need to do, but please stop threatening me in the meantime. · Katefan0 14:48, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
- ?!?!? Did you see my comment about hypocrisy above? And why do you need to keep copying Katefan0's text here? Is once not enough? — Asbestos | Talk 13:11, 5 August 2005 (UTC)