Revision as of 19:05, 17 September 2006 editRetiredUser2 (talk | contribs)24,119 edits →You have my support: good luck← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:56, 17 September 2006 edit undoCSTAR (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,870 edits →MathematicsNext edit → | ||
Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
== Mathematics == | == Mathematics == | ||
You will be missed on ], where I think you have helped to successfully achieve consensus as we improve the article. ] 18:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC) | You will be missed on ], where I think you have helped to successfully achieve consensus as we improve the article. ] 18:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC) | ||
==Email == | |||
I've also sent you an Email.--] 19:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:56, 17 September 2006
I'm leaving Misplaced Pages for a while in protest
Giano, one of our best editors has finally been driven away from Misplaced Pages, and I've decided to stop editing for a month to protest the poor treatment he has received, and the editorial climate that has allowed this. You could say I am on strike, à la mode (and no that doesn't mean "with ice cream"):
- … I simply can't imagine the amount of disrespect, unilateralism, and pettiness that has been par in the last week or two being tolerated. I have no other way, since I believe in achieving consensus, respecting the minority voices, and never trying to force my will on others, to show my displeasure aside from this. It isn't a storming away. It is a strike. Geogre,
Some things that have bothered me:
- Tony Sidaway's block of Ghirlandajo for his "defiant response" here.
- Tony Sidaway's block of Giano for being "hysterical".
ALoan expresses my thoughts well:
- … marked decrease in tolerance … I am no longer sure I know what consensus is, nor that I can trust the ArbCom and the bureaucrats to do the "right" thing. … it now seems to be a blockable offence to fully and frankly (but civilly) exchange views, or to disagree with certain admins, particularly if that disagreement is expressed in forceful (but civil) terms, and that the rules seem to change when it suits the people making the rules. ,
I encourage everyone to use my page for a constructive conversation concerning the above, and the current state of affairs on our 'pedia. I'll check back in a month. Regards all. Paul August ☎ 17:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
You have my support
People who don't even know where the articles come from are deciding that their egos' needs are greater than community, consent, consensus, and common sense, are deciding that their private beliefs are superior to the negotiated rules of the site, and are deciding that they know better than all others. For that, they deserve no articles, no input, no debate, no conversation, and no more than the isolation of their self-congratulations and self-adulation. My own strike was a labor action, and I agree with others with the same impulse. Pretty boxes and category tags and stub parades will never take the place of people willing to put their professional-level work on a volunteer project. And, if we were all replaced tomorrow, the replacements, like scabs, would soon join the desertion unless conditions were to change. Geogre 17:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- You have good points Paul. Carnildo should not have been promoted the way he was (if at all), and Tony is not one of our best admins. I can't comment anything on Giano, as I am unfamiliar with the case.
- If the current trend continues, I would also consider bailing out. So far I am left with the hope that these are just a few irregularities in an otherwise rather well-behaving community (and I think that irregularities have happened in the past too, and the ArbCom/Jimobo have taken pretty good care of the worst ones). (I hope I am right :) Good luck. Hope you come back. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 18:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I endorse the view that things are messed up around here. Carnildo's RfA was a travesty, and there is nothing I can say about Tony Sidaway's behavior of late that doesn't infringe WP:NPA. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:13, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed on both counts. I'm not sure that there's anything that could be said that wouldn't be seen by the subject as a hysterical public attack. Uh-oh, BoG, we might both be blocked now. •Jim62sch• 18:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
- Fuck! Hope your back from your strike soon. --Salix alba (talk) 18:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Good luck with your break. I can't stop you going, but I think I am staying for the time being, in an effort to try to counterbalance the prevailing idiocy. I think Geogre's WP:IAA must be the way forward. Please come back in a month - enough good people have left already. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:05, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
FYI, I've sent you an email. JoshuaZ 18:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
Mathematics
You will be missed on Mathematics, where I think you have helped to successfully achieve consensus as we improve the article. Stephen B Streater 18:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I've also sent you an Email.--CSTAR 19:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)