The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This forum is for discussing specific Wikipedia editors, editing patterns, and general efforts by those editors to influence or direct content in ways that might not be in keeping with Wikipedia policy. Please source your claims and provide links where appropriate. For a glossary of terms frequently used when discussing Wikipedia and related projects, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary.

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Deryck Chan loses a fan, player vs player
carbuncle
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 4:54am
Post #1


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,601
Joined: Sun 30th Mar 2008, 4:48pm
Member No.: 5,544



Who doesn't enjoy a Twitter fight? User:Deryck Chan is an admin on WP.
QUOTE

deryckchan Deryck Chan
Derby men guilty over gay hate leaflets http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-16656679 //I don't agree with what they say, but we should defend their right to say it.
20 Jan

Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan I see no difference between saying "all jews should burn" from "all gays should burn". Incitement to hatred is not a "right".
14 hours ago

deryckchan Deryck Chan
@Faenwp "Propose death penalty for homosexuals" is (misguided) advocacy; "We should go and burn homosexuals" is inciting hatred.
14 hours ago

Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan Proclaiming "Turn Or Burn" is incitement to hatred and demonstrated in court. Are you sure you want to support such filth?
14 hours ago

deryckchan Deryck Chan
@Faenwp Again I don't support what they say; I'm merely astonished by how far over the top our society's secularist intolerance has gone.
14 hours ago

Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan Incitement to hatred is not "secularist intolerance". You shouting offensive crap in public. You have certainly lost my respect.
14 hours ago

deryckchan Deryck Chan
@Faenwp Your response exhibits precisely that intolerance - using "equality" as an excuse to silence those with different moral views.
14 hours ago

@Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan I thought I just block you. Please fuck off with your homophobic supporting shit.
13 hours ago via web

QUOTE
@Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan Perhaps you should write to #Stonewall explaining everyone has the "right" to say that gay people should be burnt to death.
14 hours ago via web

QUOTE
@Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan To avoid bias, why not write to @JewishChron and defend the "right" to publish leaflets supporting the death penalty for Jews?
14 hours ago via web

QUOTE
Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan You support the "right" to publish statements that gay people should be burnt or stoned to death. How is that not disgusting?
14 hours ago

deryckchan Deryck Chan
@Faenwp en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_the…
14 hours ago

@Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan Your offensive homophobic and pro-incitement to hatred is too much. Quoting "First they came…" at me is stupid. Fuck off.
14 hours ago via web

deryckchan Deryck Chan
@Faenwp Since you've now resorted to swearing and personal attacks, I agree I should remove myself from this conversation.
14 hours ago

Faenwp Fae
@deryckchan Steer clear of me in future. Now I see you support incitement against queers, it is easy to see your comments in context.
13 hours ago
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eppur si muove
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 6:29am
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri 28th Nov 2008, 10:50pm
Member No.: 9,171



If "turn or burn" refers to this life and not the next, then it's hard to see it as a free speech issue rather than one of delivering threats through the letterboxes of anyone whose sex life may not meet the expected standards of religious bigots. However, it's not immediately obvious that Chan is homophobic as opposed to someone who takes Voltaire's precept to extremes.

In the good old days before Fae replaced Ash, we might also have seen a clash over the following AfD Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stud_(LGBT_usage). Of course, if this had concerned a pornagraphic photo on Commons, Fae would still have explained its educational and encyclopedic relevance.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 1:17pm
Post #3


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Eppur si muove @ Sun 22nd January 2012, 6:29am) *

If "turn or burn" refers to this life and not the next, then it's hard to see it as a free speech issue rather than one of delivering threats through the letterboxes of anyone whose sex life may not meet the expected standards of religious bigots.


Would one take the same position if the phrase used was "turn or Darth Vader will whack you with his light sabre"? Don't threats have to be credible for the law to be invoked, and also one cannot be guilty of something that it impossible to do?

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Doc glasgow
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 1:32pm
Post #4


Wikipedia:The Sump of All Human Knowledge
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,138
Joined: Sat 1st Apr 2006, 10:39pm
From: at home
Member No.: 90

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I think the point of free speech, is you need to start from the premise that anyone is entitled to say anything, as long as it isn't advocating or implying actual violence. Once you depart from that, it is the slippery slope to censorship.


I will defend your right to believe I'm going to hell, as long as you will defend my right to go there.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lilburne
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 3:14pm
Post #5


Chameleon
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined: Thu 17th Jun 2010, 11:42am
Member No.: 21,803

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Doc glasgow @ Sun 22nd January 2012, 1:32pm) *

I will defend your right to believe I'm going to hell, as long as you will defend my right to go there.


I don't think its a quid pro quo so of thing.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Doc glasgow
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 3:29pm
Post #6


Wikipedia:The Sump of All Human Knowledge
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,138
Joined: Sat 1st Apr 2006, 10:39pm
From: at home
Member No.: 90

WP user page - talk
check - contribs




No, not a quid pro quo between individuals - but it is a social contract.

I will defend the right of racist scumbags to spout their racist crap, because in doing so I am protecting my own right to speak my beliefs, without the fear that I will be silenced by the others who find them objectionable.

In the UK, where there is no fist amendment, there is a great danger that equalities legislation could result in a new liberal censorship. I think the intelligent, true liberals now realise this - and realise that freedom is tested by our willingness to defend those whose views repel us.

Which is where the "first the came for..." mantra comes in. Only to update it, you'd need:

First they came for the burka-wearers...
Then they came for the BNP...
Then they came for the Conservative Fundamentalists ...
...

France banned the burka, and as much as the idea of women having to wear them repels me, if they try to ban them here, I will be wearing one!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DanMurphy
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 3:38pm
Post #7


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 40
Joined: Wed 4th Jan 2012, 1:12pm
Member No.: 73,922

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



This is really great stuff. Mr. Van Haeften wrote and defended articles like "list of gay bathouse regulars" (information must be free! rumble rumble) with no regard to individual privacy, but supports repressing speech that he finds unpleasant. This captures the hypocrisy within the Wikipedia/Wikimedia core. "Their values" and interpretations should be expressed without fetters or fear of challenge. It's other people that must be shut up.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 6:58pm
Post #8


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(DanMurphy @ Sun 22nd January 2012, 7:38am) *

This is really great stuff. Mr. Van Haeften wrote and defended articles like "list of gay bathouse regulars" (information must be free! rumble rumble) with no regard to individual privacy, but supports repressing speech that he finds unpleasant. This captures the hypocrisy within the Wikipedia/Wikimedia core.

And we've got more examples of this. It's a daily occurrence, but I have yet to see anyone outside
the tiny little Wiki-world commenting on it in depth. Hypocrisy is a profound part of the "glorious
Wikipedia experience". Exactly reflecting Jimbo's inherent hypocrisy.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eppur si muove
post Sun 22nd January 2012, 7:16pm
Post #9


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri 28th Nov 2008, 10:50pm
Member No.: 9,171



QUOTE(lilburne @ Sun 22nd January 2012, 1:17pm) *

QUOTE(Eppur si muove @ Sun 22nd January 2012, 6:29am) *

If "turn or burn" refers to this life and not the next, then it's hard to see it as a free speech issue rather than one of delivering threats through the letterboxes of anyone whose sex life may not meet the expected standards of religious bigots.


Would one take the same position if the phrase used was "turn or Darth Vader will whack you with his light sabre"? Don't threats have to be credible for the law to be invoked, and also one cannot be guilty of something that it impossible to do?


That's why I raise the issue of whether the burning is meant to happen in this life or the next. If it's the next then it's people talking about their sadistic fantasies and just showing that they are unpleasant people. If there isn't an explicit mention of the burning being in hell, then you see how the guy in the article might be rationally scared of arson attacks through the letter box and at that point the religious nutters deserve no sympathy.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Mon 23rd January 2012, 5:51am
Post #10


.
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue 30th Nov 2010, 4:43pm
Member No.: 34,482



Fae is a blithering idiot looking for an excuse to play the homophobia card again so he can escape this latest scandal and create a new "cleanstart" account.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th 7 14, 6:14am