1,136
edits
Talk:RationalWiki (en)/Archive2: Difference between revisions
→Time to end this war: Apparently Hoover did NOT recently delete the link to the debate, thus I have been confused all this time. Struck out and added many corrections and updates to my posts.
(→Time to end this war: Apparently Hoover did NOT recently delete the link to the debate, thus I have been confused all this time. Struck out and added many corrections and updates to my posts.) |
|||
| Line 562: | Line 562: | ||
Lumenos... look. You came to Phantom Hoover's talk page, you posted more in one edit than the entire discussion between me and him, all while ignoring the message I left on ''your'' talk page. Does that sound reasonable to you? [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 15:38, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | Lumenos... look. You came to Phantom Hoover's talk page, you posted more in one edit than the entire discussion between me and him, all while ignoring the message I left on ''your'' talk page. Does that sound reasonable to you? [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 15:38, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:I suppose that could be what you were calling | :I suppose that could be what you were calling "giving in to provocation". I'm still learning your ideals on this. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 20:32, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
Seriously, I want to find a real, peaceful solution to this, and you're making it really hard. Both you and Phantom Hoover seem to have an obsession with RationalWiki. Why aren't you battling over there? I'll remind you there are thousands of other wikis listed on this site, and none of the others has generated such controversy. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 15:56, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | Seriously, I want to find a real, peaceful solution to this, and you're making it really hard. Both you and Phantom Hoover seem to have an obsession with RationalWiki. Why aren't you battling over there? I'll remind you there are thousands of other wikis listed on this site, and none of the others has generated such controversy. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 15:56, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
| Line 568: | Line 568: | ||
::There are plenty of other "appropriate actions" you could take around here. Cunningham knows we need all the help we can get. You obviously have a lot of spare time and a love for wikis, yet you choose to focus them against a single other editor. You may have a good reason, but I don't think you're doing the right thing. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 01:47, 25 September 2009 (EDT) | ::There are plenty of other "appropriate actions" you could take around here. Cunningham knows we need all the help we can get. You obviously have a lot of spare time and a love for wikis, yet you choose to focus them against a single other editor. You may have a good reason, but I don't think you're doing the right thing. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 01:47, 25 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:It depends on what you mean by "battling". My comments on this talk page are here because they concern what to put in the article here. I don't mind if we move debates to [[Lumeniki]], [[RationalWiki]], or wherever. If you "delete" them, then we would still have those options. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 20:32, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | :It depends on what you mean by "battling". My comments on this talk page are here because they concern what to put in the article here. I don't mind if we move debates to [[Lumeniki]], [[RationalWiki]], or wherever. If you "delete" them, then we would still have those options. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 20:32, 24 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:As I see it, there are two separate conflicts. I have rewritten the criticism a number of times. It seems it is improving, but this process is slow and it ''creates the other conflict with you''. The solution would be, as you suggest, to do this somewhere else, but I think they would be quite happy with | :As I see it, there are two separate conflicts. I have rewritten the criticism a number of times. It seems it is improving, but this process is slow and it ''creates the other conflict with you''. The solution would be, as you suggest, to do this somewhere else, but I think they would be quite happy with no criticism and they don't know yet whether they should have to do any of this work, or if [we] will let them delete it, <del>as they presently have.</del> [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 20:32, 24 September 2009 (EDT) <big>['''I just read the RationalWiki article and found that it is not consistent with what I had thought. I thought Phantom Hoover had recently deleted the link to the debate about the criticism but (unless someone is tampering with the edit history) he did not.'''</big> They did delete the "criticism", as I said, but I would NOT have objected or mentioned this, had I realized that they left the link to the debate. Many of my statements and my general attitude were influenced by this belief. I believe I have corrected all statements I have made on this assumption (on this page), and I apologize for this misunderstanding. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] | ||
::Heh. You just said it yourself: "they would be quite happy with no criticism and they don't know yet whether they should have to do any of this work". Can you guess why? Because they ''should not'' have to. Why is it so important that you present criticism of RationalWiki here? Or anywhere else for that matter? And if it is, why not use a blog, over which you would have full control. Think about it, if people are SO bothered by your criticism, maybe they have a point. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 01:47, 25 September 2009 (EDT) | ::Heh. You just said it yourself: "they would be quite happy with no criticism and they don't know yet whether they should have to do any of this work". Can you guess why? Because they ''should not'' have to. Why is it so important that you present criticism of RationalWiki here? Or anywhere else for that matter? And if it is, why not use a blog, over which you would have full control. Think about it, if people are SO bothered by your criticism, maybe they have a point. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 01:47, 25 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::[[WikiIndex:Policies_and_Guidelines#Criticism_of_wikis|Some other administrators seemed to support the idea of having criticism]], and there is an [[WikiIndex:Editing etiquette|etiquette policy forbidding deleting the work of others]] (which [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex%3APolicies_and_Guidelines&diff=71695&oldid=71524 you seemed to support]). But now it seems that deleting the criticism is really preferred to making the case that it is a valid criticism. Simply the fact that they have deleted it, gives you reason to believe that "they have a point" whereas my debating anything only seems to make you mad. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:16, 25 September 2009 (EDT) | :::[[WikiIndex:Policies_and_Guidelines#Criticism_of_wikis|Some other administrators seemed to support the idea of having criticism]], and there is an [[WikiIndex:Editing etiquette|etiquette policy forbidding deleting the work of others]] (which [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex%3APolicies_and_Guidelines&diff=71695&oldid=71524 you seemed to support]). But now it seems that deleting the criticism is really preferred to making the case that it is a valid criticism. Simply the fact that they have deleted it, gives you reason to believe that "they have a point" whereas my debating anything only seems to make you mad. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:16, 25 September 2009 (EDT) [Perhaps Felix was "mad" because the ''link'' to the criticism has NOT been deleted, so it was not really being censored, as I had thought at the time. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] | ||
:::[[User_talk:Lumenos#Please don't give in to provocations|You posted on my talk page that "a certain other WikiIndex user seems to be hunting down your edits"]]. It seems I have made another mistake of trying to rewrite these edits in order to reach consensus with those deleting them. Was I supposed to request page protection or what? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:16, 25 September 2009 (EDT) | :::[[User_talk:Lumenos#Please don't give in to provocations|You posted on my talk page that "a certain other WikiIndex user seems to be hunting down your edits"]]. <del>It seems I have made another mistake of trying to rewrite these edits in order to reach consensus with those deleting them.</del> Was I supposed to request page protection or what? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:16, 25 September 2009 (EDT) [Perhaps we ''have'' reached consensus after all? Although it seems the process of doing so was more trouble than it was worth for many WikiIndex admins. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] | ||
:::: You're either playing stupid, or else you really don't get it, so let me make you a drawing. It's not that you posted criticism, or that your criticism was deleted. It's that you kept posting it right back many times, against the obvious wishes of a peer (and an admin... I keep forgetting about Proxima Centauri), and then you made a huge scandal when your excessive edits led to the page being locked. We tried to mediate between you and them, but you obviously don't want to negotiate. You don't want a compromise. What are we supposed to do? Make it your way, just because? Sorry, no. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 02:13, 27 September 2009 (EDT) | :::: You're either playing stupid, or else you really don't get it, so let me make you a drawing. It's not that you posted criticism, or that your criticism was deleted. It's that you kept posting it right back many times, against the obvious wishes of a peer (and an admin... I keep forgetting about Proxima Centauri), and then you made a huge scandal when your excessive edits led to the page being locked. We tried to mediate between you and them, but you obviously don't want to negotiate. You don't want a compromise. What are we supposed to do? Make it your way, just because? Sorry, no. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 02:13, 27 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::::After this learning experience, I have added [[User:Lumenos/WikiIndex (unwritten) policies|this advice]] for newcomers who may be involved in disputes. That is an example of instructions that I would find clear, although there are many things I'm still confused about. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 03:55, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | :::::[I wasn't asking Felix for page protection, I was asking if that was what he felt I should have done to prevent people "hunting down my edits". Felix interprets many of my questions like they are "rhetorical" and tries to second-guess my reason for asking. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] After this learning experience, I have added [[User:Lumenos/WikiIndex (unwritten) policies|this advice]] for newcomers who may be involved in disputes. That is an example of instructions that I would find clear, although there are many things I'm still confused about. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 03:55, 30 September 2009(EDT) [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User%3ALumenos%2FWikiIndex_%28unwritten%29_policies&diff=72083&oldid=71557 This advice] is still mostly valid, but apparently wiki articles do not have to be in a sympathetic viewpoint. The RationalWiki article is closer to what I would describe as the neutral point of view, now, but this seems to be as much because of decisions of myself and Hoover, as the administration, so I suppose it doesn't apply to any other article. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] | ||
::: You've asked elsewhere about my plans. Honestly, I'm one step away from locking the RationalWiki article for a looong time and stripping it down to the boilerplate. I'll even link to your criticism if you care to post it elsewhere, but you ''have'' to understand that your actions here are making other people uncomfortable and ''stop''. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 02:13, 27 September 2009 (EDT) | ::: You've asked elsewhere about my plans. Honestly, I'm one step away from locking the RationalWiki article for a looong time and stripping it down to the boilerplate. I'll even link to your criticism if you care to post it elsewhere, but you ''have'' to understand that your actions here are making other people uncomfortable and ''stop''. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 02:13, 27 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::You are asking me to stop ''what'' exactly? I don't plan to add any link to any debate about a criticism, unless this is supported by a "real" policy (one you actually follow and enforce consistently). I don't think you have any idea how confusing your actions, statements, and "policies" are to me. I wish that the administration would stop blanking and locking articles, and that Dilley would not lock down the wiki, but any instructions we are given to prevent these things are sporadic and vague, in my perception, and the last lockdown was a complete surprise to everyone I read. I've slowed my posts down significantly, as requested. I haven't posted replies to a great many of your allegations, for example. I will try once again to ask you if there is anything else you are requesting. Am I getting warmer or colder? Aside from my reply to Phantom Hoover (which you moved to this location) have I been compliant with your (ambiguous) instructions? Could we have just a simple list of specific things to stop doing? And maybe I could have some idea of a limit as to how many characters per day, are too much to post? (A few clear and objective "policies", in other words.) [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 03:55, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | ::::You are asking me to stop ''what'' exactly? <del>I don't plan to add any link to any debate about a criticism, unless this is supported by a "real" policy (one you actually follow and enforce consistently).</del> [Doh! Apparently, the link to the criticism was already there. I thought it wasn't. Sorry. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] I don't think you have any idea how confusing your actions, statements, and "policies" are to me. I wish that the administration would stop blanking and locking articles, and that Dilley would not lock down the wiki, but any instructions we are given to prevent these things are sporadic and vague, in my perception, and the last lockdown was a complete surprise to everyone I read. I've slowed my posts down significantly, as requested. I haven't posted replies to a great many of your allegations, for example. I will try once again to ask you if there is anything else you are requesting. Am I getting warmer or colder? Aside from my reply to Phantom Hoover (which you moved to this location) have I been compliant with your (ambiguous) instructions? Could we have just a simple list of specific things to stop doing? And maybe I could have some idea of a limit as to how many characters per day, are too much to post? (A few clear and objective "policies", in other words.) [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 03:55, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::::Funny how nobody else finds the WikiIndex (admittedly unwritten) policies confusing. Funny how nobody else ever felt a need to write them down. Are you sure the problem is with us? Is it so difficult to just use common sense? I see Phantom Hoover has dropped the issue regarding the RationalWiki article; if you're willing to do the same (formally, as I see you're not editing it anymore), we can all move on. Then, if you want to try and establish strict policies, feel free to rally other WikiIndex members, but I predict a lukewarm response, if any. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 13:08, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | :::::Funny how nobody else finds the WikiIndex (admittedly unwritten) policies confusing. Funny how nobody else ever felt a need to write them down. Are you sure the problem is with us? Is it so difficult to just use common sense? I see Phantom Hoover has dropped the issue regarding the RationalWiki article; if you're willing to do the same (formally, as I see you're not editing it anymore), we can all move on. Then, if you want to try and establish strict policies, feel free to rally other WikiIndex members, but I predict a lukewarm response, if any. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 13:08, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::::If I am the main problem here, then why would you threaten to lock and blank the article, leaving only the edit Hoover was deleting?!?!?!? That's extremely confusing to me. We are letting Hoover have his way so he obviously has no reason to discuss the matter further. I'm looking at a more ''long-term'' solution to '''many''' such conflicts. DavidCary said about the RationalWikiWiki article, "since the history page shows back-and-forth bickering a few months ago, I wouldn't say there is "nothing" controversial about it." [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Talk%3ARationalWikiWiki&diff=71253&oldid=71223] and MarkDilley said "...I also highlight what David is saying." [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Talk%3ARationalWikiWiki&diff=71491&oldid=71457]. They could not possibly be talking about me in that case, at least. What is moving articles to talk pages supposed to solve? That is like vandalism. You are never going to get consensus that way. What happens is some editors just give up and let more aggressive editors have their way. I believe rule-by-law, is the most efficient way to | ::::::If I am the main problem here, then why would you threaten to lock and blank the article, leaving only the edit Hoover was deleting?!?!?!? That's extremely confusing to me. <del>We are letting Hoover have his way so he obviously has no reason to discuss the matter further.</del> [We were actually letting '''me''' have ''my way'', but I didn't realize it. I don't know how Hoover feels about having a link to the debated criticism. Nx deleted the link to the criticism, way back when. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)] I'm looking at a more ''long-term'' solution to '''many''' such conflicts. DavidCary said about the RationalWikiWiki article, "since the history page shows back-and-forth bickering a few months ago, I wouldn't say there is "nothing" controversial about it." [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Talk%3ARationalWikiWiki&diff=71253&oldid=71223] and MarkDilley said "...I also highlight what David is saying." [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Talk%3ARationalWikiWiki&diff=71491&oldid=71457]. They could not possibly be talking about me in that case, at least. What is moving articles to talk pages supposed to solve? That is like vandalism. <del>You are never going to get consensus that way. What happens is some editors just give up and let more aggressive editors have their way.</del> [Maybe we did happen to get "consensus" that way. But] I believe rule-by-law, is the most ''efficient'' way to [resolve disputes more painlessly]. If you and others, periodically post comments on the policy pages, just like everyone was doing before, eventually we may be able to establish some common ground on which to build a conflict resolution mechanism that is efficient, equitable, and broadly supported. It is just a matter of how long it will take. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 21:54, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::::::[http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk%3APolicies_and_Guidelines&diff=72017&oldid=72003 I'm planning to put a number of proposals in subpages] of [[WikiIndex_talk:Policies_and_Guidelines]], [[User:Lumenos]], and maybe some other places. This means '''very long posts''' when I import them, so I am wondering if this is likely to result in some sort of lockdown by you or Dilley. I honestly do not know if this is what you call "trolling trolling trolling", or what he calls "edit spamming Recent Changes", or something I am not welcome to do here. Could you sorta promise to let us know '''immediately''' before you lockdown a page or something, so that we can change what we are doing, to avoid being "punished"? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 21:54, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | ::::::[http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=WikiIndex_talk%3APolicies_and_Guidelines&diff=72017&oldid=72003 I'm planning to put a number of proposals in subpages] of [[WikiIndex_talk:Policies_and_Guidelines]], [[User:Lumenos]], and maybe some other places. This means '''very long posts''' when I import them, so I am wondering if this is likely to result in some sort of lockdown by you or Dilley. I honestly do not know if this is what you call "trolling trolling trolling", or what he calls "edit spamming Recent Changes", or something I am not welcome to do here. Could you sorta promise to let us know '''immediately''' before you lockdown a page or something, so that we can change what we are doing, to avoid being "punished"? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 21:54, 30 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
(Starting over from column one, for hopefully obvious reasons). Lumenos, all those conflicts you're referring to are over this one article. Which is just one among thousands here. Do you think it's so special to me? It's not. You made it so, by fighting other editors over it, and I'm fed up with that. What I ''really'' want is to delete it permanently, and if that wasn't so blatantly against the goals of WikiIndex, I would. As for consensus, you just mentioned two admins and an editor who seem to agree over what is right, and I'm with them.<br>So who does that leave? ''You'', Lumenos. You're the one who wants verbose policies. You're the one who forces us to wade through huge walls of text. And no, there isn't a character limit, you're just posting far more than anyone else. Can you spell "common sense" and "basic courtesy"? Can you see how badly you stand out from everyone else here?<br>And why are you so worried about being "punished"? Does your life revolve around WikiIndex or something? Well, ours doesn't. We're just trying to make it better, one little piece at a time, because that's all we can afford. Do you want to help, or do you just want to obsess endlessly over one particular article, and play victim when that bothers a whole lot of people?<br>I'll repeat my invitation over to IRC, in the hope that a real-time conversation will help us understand each other better. I don't know what else to say. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 03:50, 1 October 2009 (EDT) | (Starting over from column one, for hopefully obvious reasons). Lumenos, all those conflicts you're referring to are over this one article. Which is just one among thousands here. Do you think it's so special to me? It's not. You made it so, by fighting other editors over it, and I'm fed up with that. What I ''really'' want is to delete it permanently, and if that wasn't so blatantly against the goals of WikiIndex, I would. As for consensus, you just mentioned two admins and an editor who seem to agree over what is right, and I'm with them.<br>So who does that leave? ''You'', Lumenos. You're the one who wants verbose policies. You're the one who forces us to wade through huge walls of text. And no, there isn't a character limit, you're just posting far more than anyone else. Can you spell "common sense" and "basic courtesy"? Can you see how badly you stand out from everyone else here?<br>And why are you so worried about being "punished"? Does your life revolve around WikiIndex or something? Well, ours doesn't. We're just trying to make it better, one little piece at a time, because that's all we can afford. Do you want to help, or do you just want to obsess endlessly over one particular article, and play victim when that bothers a whole lot of people?<br>I'll repeat my invitation over to IRC, in the hope that a real-time conversation will help us understand each other better. I don't know what else to say. [[Felix Pleşoianu]] | <small>[[User talk:Felix|talk]]</small> 03:50, 1 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
:The only person I know of, who has invited me to IRC, was "Phantom Hooover". I'm on IRC now. I wrote a big long reply before "MarkDilley" and "Felix (claudeb)" showed up there so I will only post this for now. I don't like to work "in secret". I've told them I intend to copy the chat and post it publicly and Felix said he didn't have a problem with that. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 02:08, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | :The only person I know of, who has invited me to IRC, was "Phantom Hooover". I'm on IRC now. I wrote a big long reply before "MarkDilley" and "Felix (claudeb)" showed up there so I will only post this for now. I don't like to work "in secret". I've told them I intend to copy the chat and post it publicly and Felix said he didn't have a problem with that. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 02:08, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
:As I see it, the administration here has a method of making WikiIndex "better" by by blanking and locking articles (which | :As I see it, <del>the administration here has</del> [ [[MarkDilley]] and then Felix had] a method of making WikiIndex "better" by by blanking and locking articles ([one of] which [Felix] would prefer to delete?), whereas I'm suggesting we would make WikiIndex better by making broadly supported policies, and '''protecting articles according to those policies'''. (This may or may not require ''page protection''.) Blanking articles as a "punishment" just seems counter-productive to the goal of making WikiIndex better; that's all. But you are absolutely correct that I '''am''' afraid of being banned. <del>You might have noticed that unlike some of my opponents here, I don't threaten to [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page= "vandalize" the whole wiki], if I don't get my way.</del> [I don't plan to come back if I am permanently banned.] That means I have only one shot at this. This is the most prominent wiki directory to wikis, as far as I know. That makes it very notable in my mind. Being able to edit this wiki is pretty important to me, at this time in my life. If you don't share that view I believe that is because you lack the vision to see a potential gold mine here. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 05:03, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
:Perhaps you have read something by Proxima, DavidCary, or Dilley, that I have not. I will believe what I read for myself, not your claims or interpretations of them. I don't really understand your point there anyway. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 05:03, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | :Perhaps you have read something by Proxima, DavidCary, or Dilley, that I have not. I will believe what I read for myself, not your claims or interpretations of them. I don't really understand your point there anyway. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 05:03, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
:Thank you for tolerating me while it seems we have very different ideals and perceptions on these matters. I'm also grateful that you unprotected the blank RationalWiki article and that Dilley allowed you to do that. I kinda feel bad that my long posts offend you but it is difficult for me to imagine a "legitimate" reason for this. I don't see why certain editors here feel they ''have to'' read my posts. Afraid I'll say something I shouldn't be allowed to? What is more dominating, writing or | :Thank you for tolerating me while it seems we have very different ideals and perceptions on these matters. I'm also grateful that you unprotected the blank RationalWiki article and that Dilley allowed you to do that. I kinda feel bad that my long posts offend you but it is difficult for me to imagine a "legitimate" reason for this. I don't see why certain editors here feel they ''have to'' read my posts. Afraid I'll say something I shouldn't be allowed to? What is more dominating, writing or patrolling edits? But I don't exactly question your right to "rule" here. I wish I could stay within limits that you would consider polite, not just tolerable. But I must admit that I really prefer to post a lot in spite of this, and you have made many accusations and claims that I would like to defend myself from. But my feeling toward you is gratitude that in spite of how you perceive me, you seem to be allowing me free speech. I appreciate and respect that very much. I'm not sure where this will lead us, but for what it is worth anyway. (By the way, I managed to cut out about half of what I wrote before we spoke at IRC. For others looking for this chatroom: at the IRC command line type "/server irc.freenode.net", then "/join #wikiindex".) [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 05:03, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
::You "only have one shot at this"? That seems overly dramatic. This is wiki, which means you have several shots at this. Even if a page gets protected "indefinitely", chances are that someone will come along and unlock at some point in the future. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:23, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ::You "only have one shot at this"? That seems overly dramatic. This is wiki, which means you have several shots at this. Even if a page gets protected "indefinitely", chances are that someone will come along and unlock at some point in the future. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:23, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::I was talking about being banned, not page protection. I suppose bans are not usually permanent, so I guess this is unlikely. "Locking down" a wiki seems to be as extreme as permanently banning someone, but I guess Dilley doesn't think that way. From our chat Dilley said about the wiki lockdown, "it was something that i was thinking about at the time", so I guess nobody crossed a line we could not see there. Dilley said he appreciated my engagement, so it doesn't seem like I will wake up to a surprise ban tomorrow, based on some meeting of admins, that I wasn't aware of. I'm not loosing sleep here, I'm just saying I like this wiki and I want to stay. It is difficult for me to read a bunch of "accusations", "misinterpretations", etc, and not publicaly respond to most of it. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:38, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | :::I was talking about being banned, not page protection. I suppose bans are not usually permanent, so I guess this is unlikely. "Locking down" a wiki seems to be as extreme as permanently banning someone, but I guess Dilley doesn't think that way. From our chat Dilley said about the wiki lockdown, "it was something that i was thinking about at the time", so I guess nobody crossed a line we could not see there. Dilley said he appreciated my engagement, so it doesn't seem like I will wake up to a surprise ban tomorrow, based on some meeting of admins, that I wasn't aware of. I'm not loosing sleep here, I'm just saying I like this wiki and I want to stay. It is difficult for me to read a bunch of "accusations", "misinterpretations", etc, and not publicaly respond to most of it [because I am trying not to offend Felix (who says my posts are too long) or Dilley (who says my posts leave too many edits in Recent Changes). It seems like I am being asked to "self-censor", not that that is such a bad idea because the longer I have to think about something the more likely I am to avoid a mistake. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:00, 3 October 2009 (EDT)]. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 23:38, 2 October 2009 (EDT) | ||