Talk:Emergence/Litigation

Un-notified Litigation by Fourdee against Psychohistorian

Stemming from activity on the article and these talk pages, Fourdee has launched Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Psychohistorian and a complaint against him on the Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard, in both cases without notifying him, as he similarly did not notify us when he launched action demanding that the page be frozen. Hu 17:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your point? Fourdee 18:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Already made, thank you. Hu 18:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a waste of time. Did Ph personally attack Fourdee? Seems so. Does it really, really actually matter? Maybe. Will this RfC or intervention really help anything? I doubt it. It's obvious that Fourdee's blatent disregard for the distress he has caused to others was a factor in these attacks, the bickering, etc... I think Fourdee does have a lot of valid points about the need for citations etc (especially on a topic this complex and contraversial) but that Fourdee has consistantly escalated conflict, and that this RfC is merely a continuation of that. I really want this article to work, but it's not going to do that as long as the personal attacks *or* this childish behavior continue. - JustinWick 07:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

???? This section serves no purpose except to clutter the page and promote further niggling, and is placed between other sections which are actually about the article. I stand by my actions and if you would like to discuss them let's take it elsewhere. Please consider deleting or archiving this, or moving it to a subpage, in the interest of returning to work on the article itself. Fourdee 10:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This section was simply meant as a notice. I did not expect discussion, but (surprise) Fourdee has generated some. Just as this article and these talk pages are important background for your litigations, people working on this article would benefit from considering your litigations as a background for your remarks and actions here. If you were really interested in working on the article, you would begin by calming down, de-escalating, and dropping your several vexatious litigations. But I think the real truth is when you wrote "This topic is a poor use of my energy" [1] in your very first post on these talk pages. I suggest you gather the courage to get out of the way and to withdraw. Hu 14:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The attempt to stir controversy by running discussion of this complaint in three different places on Wikipedia has, I believe, resulted in a stalling of the work needed to be done on this article. I am confident that the admins and reviewers can address that other issue competently. It is up to us participants (Fourdee, Thulean/Lucas19, and myself) to shut up and let them do it in peace and refocus our energies on this page towards creating a better article.-Psychohistorian 19:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]