User talk:Huw Powell: Difference between revisions
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Hello again, I'm writing in reference to your recent edit of the [[RationalWiki]] article, wherein you removed the link to the following argument. "[[Talk:RationalWiki#Criticism_and_rebuttals|Wikipedia achieves the stated goals of RationalWiki better than RationalWiki does]]". Your edit summary was, "11:08, 1 September 2009 [...] (Lumenos, please whine on the talk page.)" <del>Did you read the argument?</del> [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 10:04, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | Hello again, I'm writing in reference to your recent edit of the [[RationalWiki]] article, wherein you removed the link to the following argument. "[[Talk:RationalWiki#Criticism_and_rebuttals|Wikipedia achieves the stated goals of RationalWiki better than RationalWiki does]]". Your edit summary was, "11:08, 1 September 2009 [...] (Lumenos, please whine on the talk page.)" <del>Did you read the argument?</del> [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 10:04, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:I'm sorry, I found that you had in fact replied, but due to the location ( | :I'm sorry, I found that you had in fact replied, but due to the location ([...]the general disorganization of talk pages [and my inexperience with wiki editing]) I neglected to notice it until now. I have answered your rebuttal and I will give you some time to formulate a response (if you should wish to do so) before possibly adding the comment back. [[WikiIndex:Policies_and_Guidelines#How_sympathetic_or_critical.3F_.28Who_decides.3F.29|Consensus on this matter seems to be <del>favoring the creation of separate articles for Constructive Criticism (although where the links to these articles may be is less clear</del>)]][Well just read the link.]. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 13:13, 3 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::"Consensus" is you and Proxima agreeing? Also, you completely ignored and failed to understand the responses to your bizarre WP vs RW thesis. Also, why don't you respond to comments where they are made? [[User:Huw Powell|Huw Powell]] 00:50, 4 September 2009 (EDT) | ::"Consensus" is you and Proxima agreeing? Also, you completely ignored and failed to understand the responses to your bizarre WP vs RW thesis. Also, why don't you respond to comments where they are made? [[User:Huw Powell|Huw Powell]] 00:50, 4 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::It '''seemed''' like Dilley might favor it, but I should obviously take into account the editors edits and not just the policy page when making determinations about consensus. So I apologize for that. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 11:51, 4 September 2009 (EDT) | :::It '''seemed''' like Dilley might favor it, but I should obviously take into account the editors edits and not just the policy page when making determinations about consensus. So I apologize for that. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 11:51, 4 September 2009 (EDT) |
Revision as of 07:59, 6 September 2009
Hello,
Huw Powell,
I(we) have thousands of things to do. I think your are aware that WikiIndex has no cyber judge function (at present). Would you be so kind as to give CP and other readers time to overthink your point of view. With the hope that my english is understandable. Regards --Wolf | talk 03:33, 10 July 2009 (EDT)
- I think you mean PC, not CP? Your English is far better than my German. Far, far better. And thank you for the welcome! Huw Powell 06:12, 12 July 2009 (EDT)
Censoring dissenting opinion
Hello again, I'm writing in reference to your recent edit of the RationalWiki article, wherein you removed the link to the following argument. "Wikipedia achieves the stated goals of RationalWiki better than RationalWiki does". Your edit summary was, "11:08, 1 September 2009 [...] (Lumenos, please whine on the talk page.)" Did you read the argument? Lumenos 10:04, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
- I'm sorry, I found that you had in fact replied, but due to the location ([...]the general disorganization of talk pages [and my inexperience with wiki editing]) I neglected to notice it until now. I have answered your rebuttal and I will give you some time to formulate a response (if you should wish to do so) before possibly adding the comment back. Consensus on this matter seems to be
favoring the creation of separate articles for Constructive Criticism (although where the links to these articles may be is less clear)[Well just read the link.]. Lumenos 13:13, 3 September 2009 (EDT)- "Consensus" is you and Proxima agreeing? Also, you completely ignored and failed to understand the responses to your bizarre WP vs RW thesis. Also, why don't you respond to comments where they are made? Huw Powell 00:50, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
- It seemed like Dilley might favor it, but I should obviously take into account the editors edits and not just the policy page when making determinations about consensus. So I apologize for that. Lumenos 11:51, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
- Why do I quote? I find it keeps things better organized. Your idea of not quoting, has merit. I do appreciate that you allow me to decide where we will be having discussions. Face it Powell, resistance is futile. All will be assimilated into the Lumenati hive mind! ;-) Lumenos 09:38, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
- On my RW vs WP thesis: You mean how I told you I favor your description of the wiki over that of your authorities there? Lumenos 09:38, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
- "Consensus" is you and Proxima agreeing? Also, you completely ignored and failed to understand the responses to your bizarre WP vs RW thesis. Also, why don't you respond to comments where they are made? Huw Powell 00:50, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
Secondly, if you have any suggestions for why WikiIndex should not allow certain criticisms, or how to objectively judge which ones should or should not be allowed, your reasoning on this matter would be appreciated in this section of the policy page. Lumenos 10:03, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
- Yeah, quit with your power grab. You've made up some lame policy page with virtually no input from the site's owners, and it's barely readable. You fail at "wiki discussion". Huw Powell 00:50, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
- How could I "grab" power? How do you feel about basic democratic ideals such as rule by law, equal protection under the law, and separation of power? Lumenos 09:38, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
- You noticed it is not really a policy page? There isn't any. So it is a policy development page and a page that links to what clues I could find (without bothering anyone) about what to expect from the administration. That is all we have so far. Dilley seems okay with having it here so long as it is not in a "neutral point of view". So we changed that. If it causes some problem, I will adapt it for Lumeniki and that's that. Is the power of suggestion really so threatening to you? Lumenos 09:38, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
My "agenda"
The following is a quote from Huw Powell taken from this location: "Lumenos seems to have one agenda here, and that is fairly clear when one looks at L's contribs." Huw Powell 07:14, 1 September 2009 (EDT)
- Hum now you went from "seems to have" to "fairly clear", but you don't feel any need to describe the this agenda? I'd be interested in hearing what you perceive that to be. Is it comedy? Direct action? I've no idea what you are referring to. Lumenos 05:47, 3 September 2009 (EDT)
The following is a quote from Huw Powell taken from this location: "I think the general policy here is to simply describe wikis, not to engage in petty arguments about their worldview. Huw Powell 07:14, 1 September 2009 (EDT)"
- Oh. And have you been merely attempting to defend your
"pet"[favored] wiki from these petty arguments, or are you completely uninvolved in these supposed debates "about [wikis] worldview[s]"? Lumenos 05:47, 3 September 2009 (EDT)- Why don't you respond to what I said where I said it
, you freak?Huw Powell 00:47, 4 September 2009 (EDT)- Oh, and if one looks at the contribs I linked to, Lumenos appears to have a very intense interest in two things: the RationalWiki article, on whose talk page he expresses rather odd confusion, and writing policy for wikiindex. In case no one is paying attention. Huw Powell 02:27, 4 September 2009 (EDT)
- Why don't you respond to what I said where I said it