QUOTE(FT2 @ Sat 17th January 2009, 2:19pm)
Question for you though. Do you really believe I've studied or been involved in most of what I edit in depth on? Do you believe I'm a lawyer because I authored a number of law articles and added in-depth on a range of others?
No, and ditto the others. My claim was that certain of your edits were
biased and slanted. Having been through many of your edits, I can confirm absolutely that there is no evidence
whatsoever you have practised any of the things you talked about. I already said this while discussing the issue in private with WJBScribe last year. But you nonetheless put a positive and (to my mind) biased slant on many of those edits.
Many people will no doubt disagree about the bias (Giano already has). But the point is the authorship of the edits should not have been disguised as they were. If there was nothing wrong with them, why couldn't the community make its own mind up? Most people, including Thatcher, think that the community was liberal-minded enough to see past that.
My main concern at the time and afterwards was the Neurolinguistic programming articles, and I bitterly regret having brought the other matter up at all.
QUOTE(Giano @ Sat 17th January 2009, 2:35pm)
However, writing about bestiality, or whether it is now called, is perfectly legitimate. You may not like it, but coverage of the subject is lawful. There is not one scrap of evidence to suggest that FT2 was anything more than a writer on the subject, and had FT2 had better communication skills this matter would have been brought to a better conclusion months ago.
See my comment above. I will publish my correspondence with Scribe if necessary. My disagreement was with the way the edits seemed to
promote the subject. That is a matter of editorial judgment, and also a matter relevant to the 2007 elections. I put forward the view (on a page which is now unfortunately also oversighted) that having someone promoting these views in this way on the Arbcom would turn out to be a public relations disaster, and would split the community.
A view which turned out to be entirely correct.
[edit] If it helps, can I apologise to FT2 here and now. I am sorry for the intemperate comments I made during the week of Dec 4 2007. I have an appalling temper and should know better. I bitterly regret all those remarks.
Nonetheless, I stick to my claim about 'positive promotion' of a controversial subject.
Should we not move on? There are other issues that have not been put to bed. If my private discussion with Scribe had not been completely derailed by the oversights, if Jimbo had bothered to reply to my complaints the following week, the whole matter would have been closed in a matter of days. The rest is history, of course.
It is Gerard and Jimbo whom the focus should be on now.
This post has been edited by Peter Damian: