Future Perfect at Sunrise rogering Prostitution in South Korea, Korean Kabal at work Options

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

(IMG:http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2050/3533039214_c979f9173d.jpg)

Another little example of the Korean Kabal, and their defending admin Future Perfect at Sunrise - aka Dr. Lukas Pietsch of the University of Hamburg Germany - at work on Prostitution in South Korea. Readers might remember how Dr. Lukas Pietsch was accused by another member elsewhere on this forum of favoring some races/nationalities over others.

This was a removal of over 100 references.

• Prostitution in South Korea before Dr. Lukas Pietsch.

• Prostitution in South Korea after Dr. Lukas Pietsch.

• Diffs; here.

With a neat dash of extra chilli from Kuebie as a last minute "purification" of any flavor of 'sennen goroshi' finally, thereby reducing the topic back into the state that our Kimchi Warrior Caspian blue left in 3 October 2008 .

At least proving that Caspian blue et al are not just anti-Japanese but care enough to engage in a nice bit of Korea-washing whenever they can ... with the collusion of helpful "neutral", policy-following admins too.

Page Pietsch Protected. Now, honest, I could pull another dozen or more Korean or Korea-Japanese topics that have been going through this same, and even more manic, routinue. Does it matter? Does anyone really care?

OK ... nah. I understand. There is just too much of it going on everywhere else to care.

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy:

[Peter Damian]

Look: THIS IS THE TYPE OF ARTICLE THAT SHOULD NOT BE ON WIKIPEDIA AT ALL AND SHOULD BE DELETED ON SIGHT.

Along with all minor blps, articles about sex with animals, sex with children, and the rest of the stuff that belongs in the dustbin.

There is certainly a way of handling subjects like these. But don't let them near Wikipedians. Are we all agreed?

This post has been edited by Peter Damian:

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

Look: THIS IS THE TYPE OF ARTICLE THAT SHOULD NOT BE ON WIKIPEDIA AT ALL AND SHOULD BE DELETED ON SIGHT.

Which article? I was painting a broad brush stroke across may be 10 or 20 topics, or more. Do you mean just this article's topic, or the manner in which the topic and editors have been manhandled to date?

Obviously an article on "Prostitution in South Korea" should not read as a 'Howto' or 'Whereto' for sex tourists ... but how to apply such a judgement universally? It would be impossible, would not it?

A problem then arises with the overall asymmetry of administration prejudices and "communal acceptability", arising from a lack of editorial control and qualifications, that comprises the broad cultural bias and aggressive environment present on the Wikipedia ... which is the issue I attempted to raise intelligently.

What I mean, in plain English, is that it might be perfectly "acceptable" and defendable for a number of editors to run a nationalist 'shitsmear' against one country, or a load of boys exclude an alternative feminist critique, but impossible to post single verifiable and relevant "fact" about a small sector within another, without being dragged into full scale ethnic conflicts with users suffering the lack of principles equivalent to a Caspian blue.

Its a farce. Its not fixable.

[Cla68]

Its a farce. Its not fixable.

Then choose a different battle. "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change"