Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pjetholjocques (talk | contribs) at 20:57, 15 December 2021 (→As I understood, you worship academicians and thus believe that they are gods: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I am on an extended break from Misplaced Pages, so any messages will probably go unanswered for some time.

Your account

I know you’re on a wiki break, but if you happen to read this could you contact me if you’ve had failed login attempts to your account in the last 24 hours. Thanks. DeCausa (talk) 19:27, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

DeCausa, thank you for contacting me. No, I had not attempted to log in at during the last 30 hours. When I now did, I got an automated message there had been 45 failed attempts to log into my account. Never happened before. Jeppiz (talk) 20:33, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you know when the logins were attempted? (See this and this.) DeCausa (talk) 20:50, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. So hardly a coincidence that all three of us are victims of an attack. As I had not been logged in for 30 hours, I'm not sure when the attacks occurred. Jeppiz (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

As I understood, you worship academicians and thus believe that they are gods

Because I can't explain these two quotes in any other way:

You misunderstand WP:NPOV; it's not about finding a compromise between academia and religion. It is about accurately representing what academics say about religion. Jeppiz (talk) 18:07, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

That's your own personal belief that academicians are always truth-telling, never-misapprehending super spirits and their words must be accepted as facts. I mean, if you are a polotheistic who accept all secular academicians are gods, you would've agree such of a proposition you made. But not everyone would agree to that it's neutral those old-ass naturalist secular academicians talking shit about their religion.

The more serious problem in your arguments above is that you continously imply we should find some middle road between faith and scholarship. We should not, as that would be the opposite of WP:NPOV. I know many people misunderstand NPOV and think it's about meeting halfway. It is not; it's about representing the most reliable sources as accurately as possible. Jeppiz (talk) 09:52, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Who said that reliable sources are always secular ones? Or if nobody did say, then why you force people to follow them so? Materialism, naturalism, irreligionism and secularism all are not proven objectively. Beliefs that have one mutual point that making them weak; they all are confirmed to be founded by humans. As they don't have any extra-human witness or confirmer, and they usually don't claim to have, who is the exact authority to tell that we should follow people to believe in these? For example, why not to follow creationist scientists but them? Why not religious scholars but irreligious ones? Basically, why not subjective opinion X, but subjective opinion Y?

My very honest advice: Stop believing in dogmatism unless you accept it is dogmatism. Pjetholjocques (talk) 13:14, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

As you claim that I am a sock; please cite some secular academicians that are confirming I am a sock puppet. Or else just answer my questions. Pjetholjocques (talk) 20:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)