| Revision as of 08:19, 3 July 2006 editSte4k (talk | contribs)3,630 edits Gender classification | Latest revision as of 18:44, 4 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| JD_UK wrote in the response, "As for Ste4k, I initially did not feel there was any conflict, but his(?) decision..." I find it personally insulting that an editor would insist on assuming the incorrect gender even after being warned. That may be the cultural norm in Austrailia in regard to women, however, this is an NPOV encyclopedia, and there isn't any call for anyone purposely trying to act as if one hasn't been told before. ] 08:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | JD_UK wrote in the response, "As for Ste4k, I initially did not feel there was any conflict, but his(?) decision..." I find it personally insulting that an editor would insist on assuming the incorrect gender even after being warned. That may be the cultural norm in Austrailia in regard to women, however, this is an NPOV encyclopedia, and there isn't any call for anyone purposely trying to act as if one hasn't been told before. ] 08:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :Well, are you male or female? I don't feel comfortable using gender-neutral pronouns, I find them rude and insulting when used. That's why I prefer not to use them. --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 08:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::I think it's quite obvious that ste4k is female. -- ]]<sup>]</sup> 10:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::Ah, right... It's not that obvious, actually, or I would have been referring to her as a female before. Sorry. --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 10:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Cooperation and failure to participate in consensus. == | |||
| In the response, JD_UK wrote: "I opened a mediation case to try and get a third perspective on the situation, but I did not feel that a reasonable solution had been reached." | |||
| :Two other editors had one opinion, and JD_UK disregarded their opinions. | |||
| In the response, JD_UK wrote: "9cds often says that I am unable to compromise, but I feel that the same can be said of her". | |||
| :9cds started a consensus poll which lasted several days and that editors participating agreed about past tense. JD_UK refused to participate in the consensus poll. After it had been established that a consensus was reached, JD_UK proceeded to ignore it altogether and even make edits that were specifically in disregard to consensus reached. | |||
| ] 08:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :I made a comment. My opinion wouldn't have fit in any one of the voting categories, so I made a comment, explaining my point of view. And which two editors had an opinion, and what would that opinion be? --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 08:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :The vote does not say that everything should be in past tense. If anybody ignored this, it's you. You put everything back into past tense. --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 09:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Ignoring anybody == | |||
| In the reponse, JD_UK wrote: "I've been told quite a few times by 9cds and Ste4k that I do not listen to what other people have to say, but I do not see anything that would suggest that I have ignored anybody." | |||
| , clearly suggest that he ingored somebody: "He did actually say he was considering nominating the article for deletion; but I didn't think he would actually do it. --JDtalkemail 16:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)" | |||
| Even in the section above on this discussion page, JD_UK ignores the clause "assuming the incorrect gender". I will no longer respond directly to this editor as all previous conversations have resulted only in adamant refusal to consider another person's opinion on practically any matter. | |||
| ] 08:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :"Adamant refusal to consider another person's opinion" is a matter of opinion. I do consider other peoples' opinions, and I did ask whether you were male or female to try and resolve at least that one problem. If you don't want to reply to my messages anymore, then that's fine, considering the circumstances. --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 08:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ::JD_UK also calls/called me he many times, despite many warnings that I am female. -- ]]<sup>]</sup> 10:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| :::It's not as easy as you all make it out to be, you know. --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 10:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| == Closure == | |||
| I believe this RfC should be cancelled seeing as 9cds has now "retired" ] 12:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Er, what's happening to this? --<span style="font-family:verdana;"><small>]</small><nowiki>]</sup>|<sub>]</sub></span>] 16:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC) | |||
| Dispute appears to be moot. Ste4k is gone as well. What's procedure to close? ] 22:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
| There is not such thing as "closure of an RfC". It technically ends when noone has anything else to say on the matter in question. Should someone find anything to add in the future however, (s)he's welcome to do so. In this sense, the RfC stays "open" forever. ]] <sup><u>'''] ]'''</u></sup> 12:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:44, 4 February 2023
Gender classification
JD_UK wrote in the response, "As for Ste4k, I initially did not feel there was any conflict, but his(?) decision..." I find it personally insulting that an editor would insist on assuming the incorrect gender even after being warned. That may be the cultural norm in Austrailia in regard to women, however, this is an NPOV encyclopedia, and there isn't any call for anyone purposely trying to act as if one hasn't been told before. Ste4k 08:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- Well, are you male or female? I don't feel comfortable using gender-neutral pronouns, I find them rude and insulting when used. That's why I prefer not to use them. --JD 08:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's quite obvious that ste4k is female. -- 9cds 10:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, right... It's not that obvious, actually, or I would have been referring to her as a female before. Sorry. --JD 10:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's quite obvious that ste4k is female. -- 9cds 10:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Cooperation and failure to participate in consensus.
In the response, JD_UK wrote: "I opened a mediation case to try and get a third perspective on the situation, but I did not feel that a reasonable solution had been reached."
- Two other editors had one opinion, and JD_UK disregarded their opinions.
In the response, JD_UK wrote: "9cds often says that I am unable to compromise, but I feel that the same can be said of her".
- 9cds started a consensus poll which lasted several days and its conclusion showed clearly that editors participating agreed about past tense. JD_UK refused to participate in the consensus poll. After it had been established that a consensus was reached, JD_UK proceeded to ignore it altogether and even make edits that were specifically in disregard to consensus reached.
Ste4k 08:28, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- I made a comment. My opinion wouldn't have fit in any one of the voting categories, so I made a comment, explaining my point of view. And which two editors had an opinion, and what would that opinion be? --JD 08:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- The vote does not say that everything should be in past tense. If anybody ignored this, it's you. You put everything back into past tense. --JD 09:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Ignoring anybody
In the reponse, JD_UK wrote: "I've been told quite a few times by 9cds and Ste4k that I do not listen to what other people have to say, but I do not see anything that would suggest that I have ignored anybody."
JD_UK's own words, during an AfD, clearly suggest that he ingored somebody: "He did actually say he was considering nominating the article for deletion; but I didn't think he would actually do it. --JDtalkemail 16:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)"
Even in the section above on this discussion page, JD_UK ignores the clause "assuming the incorrect gender". I will no longer respond directly to this editor as all previous conversations have resulted only in adamant refusal to consider another person's opinion on practically any matter.
Ste4k 08:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- "Adamant refusal to consider another person's opinion" is a matter of opinion. I do consider other peoples' opinions, and I did ask whether you were male or female to try and resolve at least that one problem. If you don't want to reply to my messages anymore, then that's fine, considering the circumstances. --JD 08:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- JD_UK also calls/called me he many times, despite many warnings that I am female. -- 9cds 10:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's not as easy as you all make it out to be, you know. --JD 10:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
- JD_UK also calls/called me he many times, despite many warnings that I am female. -- 9cds 10:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Closure
I believe this RfC should be cancelled seeing as 9cds has now "retired" ellisjm 12:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Er, what's happening to this? --JD 16:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Dispute appears to be moot. Ste4k is gone as well. What's procedure to close? Newyorkbrad 22:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
There is not such thing as "closure of an RfC". It technically ends when noone has anything else to say on the matter in question. Should someone find anything to add in the future however, (s)he's welcome to do so. In this sense, the RfC stays "open" forever. Misza13 12:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)