Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:16, 22 January 2015

My opening gambit

Hello Renejs,

I have developed over the years, in my OT/Hebrew Scripture historical studies, a decidedly radical minimalist approach and position.

I have been following with interest the developments here in NT (with an eye for trying to feel the possible impact that OT minimalism can have in NT), and since you have just mentioned Lemche's and Thompson's supposed professional predicament in Kopenhagen, I thought I could ask you:

What would they have to fear, in terms of their academic positions and reputations, by pushing more overtly for the establishment of an NT minimalist current, at least in Europe?

Since this would all really fall under the rubric of a personal conversation ("eye-to-eye" as much as possible in written digital communications) about academic politics and epistemological strategies, feel free, if you are so inclined, to just reply to my email directly, through my own user page, where on the Tools menu on the left side you should see the option "Email this user." I was looking for this option here on your page, but I couldn't see/find it.

Best regards, warshy 19:35, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Indenting paragraphs

You know, indenting paragraphs of comments really, really looks weird around here, and makes it somewhat harder to instantly visibly determine what is part of the same comment and what isn't. Using a : at the start of each paragraph in the same comment is the more standard procedure around here, and honestly makes comments somewhat easier to read. John Carter (talk) 21:49, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

In the mean time, I just fixed it. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 21:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

ANI

There is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.Jeppiz (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2013

This is the final warning you will receive. Please refrain from casting nonproductive personal aspersions on others as you have done in this edit. If you continue, the already extant chance that you will be blocked from editing will grow much more likely. John Carter (talk) 01:45, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi John. I'm trying to figure out exactly what the warning is for. The use of "BS" in my last post to Bill the Cat 7 referred to what he was saying--not to him. (I would use a phrase like "arrogant bastard" for that, if I were being ad hominem.)

I sense I'm coming to the end of my short Wiki life and am wondering: isn't it COI that you're both an administrative Clerk and one of the editors of the CMT page? Here' what one reads: "no Clerk should be involved in a case as both a Clerk and participant" I mean, I've got you logged making multiple substantive comments

I'm an atheist writer on religion and research is my bag. I'm fairly good at that--you know, finding ways to dig and tease out the nitty-gritty quickly. I'm writing articles for various mags and online blogs about Misplaced Pages "from the inside." I'll basically be chronicling my digital wiki-voyage and how the encyclopedia has managed to pretty much turn this well-meaning newbie into a disgruntled bannee in less than a month! Wow. It's been quite an education and, as you can imagine, a negative experience for me. To be frank, I had expected better--even though I admittedly bring a highly controversial view to the table. Anyway, I can now better appreciate words like "quagmire" and "highly dysfunctional" when applied to the encyclopedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/User:Beyond_My_Ken/thoughts#A_personal_prescription_for_surviving_Wikipedia).

Of course, I've gotten to know apparent Wiki-faves (like Meijerling) MUCH better than I'd planned. It didn't take him long to pull me on the carpet (ANI)! I also haven't been able to get squat done on the CMT page (the single page I chose for my "project," since I know the subject so well). My main interest is investigative work in religious history, and I don't have a lot of time for marginally related issues like Misplaced Pages. But, of course, this digital encyclopedia has become important as an information 'first stop' for the average citizen, and that's why the view from an atheist perspective is needed. It's rather sad that 'Wiki-religion' is basically mired in the Stone Age, resisting new ideas with a vengeance, and cleaving to rather conservative (e.g. 1977) views in its religion pages. That's my take right now, anyway. If that's the truth, then Misplaced Pages is doing a disservice to society and this is not, I believe, at all what Jimbo Wales intended. But I still hold out that 'theoretical' dream which he and many must have, and am saddened to see the 'practice' turn out so differently.

I've been pretty aggressive--just to expedite matters--and will try to be fair in my evaluations of Wikpedia in print and perhaps on the boob tube later this year. I also had hoped to effect some change in one or two religion articles. . . But I've now pretty much given that up, seeing how the deck appears to be strongly stacked against my liberal view in such a conservative fashion--and seeing how I'm being quickly railroaded out the door! This is rather sad and somewhat discouraging for people with my point of view. Just thought you might want to know.

Regards,

Renejs (talk) 11:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)