Mon 23rd June 2008, 5:37pm
QUOTE(Lar @ Sun 22nd June 2008, 12:09pm)
I don't agree with "this endless stream of derision" either... we are none of us perfect, but this does seem a bit spiteful to me. I think you give some good advice to Durova about where her strengths and weaknesses lie.
I'm sorry Lar, but.....
...If you call it a weakness to call a suicidal boys school and paint him as a danger
so he winds up getting kicked out...
... If you call it a weakness to tell an AP Reporter that a small business owner is a liar
, and repeat this lie online....
... If you call it a weakness to have him re-banned right after reinstatement when he asks you to apologize
... if you call it weakness to making up a baldfaced whopper when somenoe's getting attacked by a group, so a bunch of libel gets published
... if you call it weakness to write an SEO Journal Article alleging "unethical edits" about a Congressional Press Officer
- using the power of your "position" as a Wikipedia Admnistrator - when he did no wrong and likening his innocent removal of cruft by a radical detractor from boss's bio and liken it a real Congressional scandal the year prior.
... if you call it weakness to give interviews about the Press Officer's innocent edit to the politically-slanted press who use the false allegation you enshrined online
causing the Tennessee Democratic party leader to make stinging commentary to the press, and invoking a US House Ethics Investigation (which of course found no wrongdoing).
... if you call it weakness to not retract your false allegation when informed of the nuances you missed
and have your friends ban the IP that provided this information, and TO THIS DAY that Press Officer story remains on Wikinews, and in the Congressional Scandal articles and you still do nothing.
... if you call jumping in EVERY debate and issue only to make a wild slamming ham fest
out of it, to the person in questions detriment (Kohs falls in this category)
... If you call it a weakness to circulate false information about a trusted user (!!)
and then cut off his efforts to not-be-banned (by her) by chanting "take it to Arbcom" which you know will validate your false accusation...
... if you call it a weakness to do all of the above
, and more, and still not admit you were EVER wrong, but claim that you had to resign as Wikipedia Administrator because you were "stalked and harassed"
(in the podcast in which foolish Jim Hedger allowed her to speak her special world view and unique "take" on reality) by obsessed Wikipedia Review persons, and conveniently mention Kohs and Brandt's names in the next paragraph (on her blog). When you REALLY were forced to resign because hundreds of Wikipedians protested
that Jimbo defended you when you'd made one too many accusations, and this time of a favored friend of many (the !! scandal, and press firestorm in November 2007
) leading to the launch of 1000 blogs and mainstream press interest
in the biggest Wikipedia scandale
since Essjay (usurped only by Jimbo's Ebay-sale breakup with Marsden).
Then I'd call your weakness "apologism".
With a heavy side dish of denial.
Lar. BE serious.