QUOTE(Angela Kennedy @ Mon 6th June 2011, 2:33am)
I am being libelled, because I'm being accused of sockpuppetting and desperately trying to get back into that cesspool, when I am actually NOT some wikipedia obsessor trying to get back in.
But that's how they think, they believe they are the center of the universe and that everyone else wants to be there. Actually, they are a low place in a muddy area and polluted area.
QUOTE
I'm actually an academic working on something important- who made the mistake initially of believing wikipedia was an arena where correctin of misinformation could be done.
The encyclopedia that anyone can edit, even experts. Oops! Not anyone. Anyone with a point of view is to be excluded, only experts with no point of view are welcome. Which is an oxymoron. Experts always have a point of view, though there are some who are also capable of objectivity; still, to non-experts, even these can seem to have a point of view to "push." Like, what they know!
QUOTE
I didn't realise it was the cesspool it is at the time. But now- as someone who is critical of wikipedia as an academic, as someone who is critical of other issues as both an advocate for her daughter AND academically, getting accused of socking like this is in danger of discrediting my good name!
Nah.
Look, Angela, this incident didn't result in charges against you of socking. Catherine Sanderson was blocked for her own behavior. There is some suspicion expressed, that's true, but the conclusion was that it didn't matter if CS was AK or not. No SSP report was filed, and CS has not been tagged as a suspected sock puppet of AK, at least not yet.
This is what CS wrote (as her IP) that caused strong suspicion that she was you:
QUOTE
I was banned from editing any pages of Wikipedia by Jimbo Wales, in October 2007, following a kangaroo court on the Admin Discussion pages (I keep Mr Wales' email framed in the downstairs cloakroom). My crimes were "Wiki lawyering" and using my own discussion page for alleged "Soapboxing". Even the suitability of my User name was discussed by some Admins, as it matched a website of the same name.
We are led inexorably to a conclusion: CS is you, or CS is impersonating you, other possible explanations are weak and unlikely. In either case, they will think, blocking CS is appropriate.
If CS is not you, Angela, then you can be glad they blocked her!
QUOTE
Jeez abd, we don't all LOVE wikipedia and want to get back into their bed! I have actually have real world consequences upon me as a result of this shit. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/angry.gif)
Maybe you should read my history there as well.
Why? Angela, the story is boring, it's so common.
You, and hundreds or thousands of cases like you, demonstrate Wikipedia's lack of commitment to true consensus, which would require careful deliberative process, and which is essential to neutrality. "POV-pushing" is an essential part of that process. But because WP did not develop methods of engaging in the conversations that would produce true consensus, and because it is actually averse to such -- they can be long! -- POV-pushing is considered Bad, resulting in what I called, in an essay about to be deleted, "MPOV-pushing," majority point of view pushing, where minority opinions -- or what are thought to be by a majority of the core cabal to be minority opinions -- are rejected and excluded.
It's a result of the election method used for administrators and arbitrators, in fact, it will lead to this kind of situation, like clockwork. The power structure does not represent minorities, at all.
By the way, you were, on the face of it, blocked for making legal threats. Technically, this block should have been lifted if you retracted the threats. Did you ever do that? (Making legal threats on Wikipedia, which includes statements like "I'll forward the information to my solicitor, can be expected to result in immediate block. My question would be: why did you do this? By all means, forward mails to your solicitor, and let your solicitor contact someone, or file a suit, but don't say a whisper of it on WP!) And then refuse to discuss it if asked.
This post has been edited by Abd: