QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Wed 28th April 2010, 4:22pm)
QUOTE(Moulton @ Wed 28th April 2010, 8:12am)
Erik Moeller has posted a
lengthy response on his personal blog, which is curiously entitled,
Intelligent Designs.
I suppose when it comes to
feeling defamed, Erik can anticipate some empathy from those who similarly felt defamed by their scandalous treatment at the hands of ethically challenged Wikipedians.
Moeller is distancing himself from his earlier statements and spinning them to be more acceptable to normal society. He now says that he only meant to not condemn near-same-age statutory rape type of sex between young adults and their almost adult sexual partners. It is a good sign that he is running from his past unacceptable statements. Yet he still uses weasel words. He is now against "sexual violence against children" which leaves one to wonder if he is only talking about adult/child sex with additional use of violence or the adult/child sex as being a form violence itself.
Yes, directly pointing to his "misrepresented response" is not particularly wise, because he does present a number of ideas which are, shall we say, challenging, including the idea that it is fine for pre-teens to have sex and that he can see no problem with that.
Actually, I notice that we have, even in 2001, evidence of an emergent Wikipedian mindset:
QUOTE
If you are irritated by the length of this comment, please read only the parts that interest you.
(IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/wtf.gif)