User talk:Zvika/Interview/ScienceApologist

Sad

Couldn't even get through the answer to the first question without launching an attack on another editor. Sad. Dlabtot (talk) 07:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dlabtot, first, he's being open about not caring about civility. That is a principled stand, which I respect a lot more than just breaking it. Second, civility is not the deeper issue, which I'd hope the community would come and discuss. ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 08:48, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mistake to get hung up on 'civility' as if reasonable discourse were all about some kindergarten code of conduct. I didn't say anything about civility and I wasn't raising any issue of civility. There is absolutely nothing uncivil about the language or tone of SA's remarks. All I did was comment on that I found it sad that in response to a question about introducing himself, he saw fit to attack you. True, the question also asks "What drew you to edit the "fringe" articles?" so maybe his response here shows that this is really more about a personal vendetta or issue between two editors than it really is some grand issue, I don't know. Maybe I was just hoping for something more interesting, informative, or insightful than another round of "he is a POV pusher". Dlabtot (talk) 09:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since that is what Martin is, I'm pretty happy with my response. This is an interview, and in my estimation Martin should be totally banned from this encyclopedia. I think you should be too, but one thing at a time. ScienceApologist (talk) 15:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For what reason? Dlabtot (talk) 16:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's that shiny thing you guys are dangling in front of SA? - 66.30.77.62 (talk) 16:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None of that. I didn't dangle any bait, and I tried to get things to be a discussion of the more important issues. If this is going to be another free-for-all with only the same old characters, I'm not going to participate. And I will not put up with being blamed for the way SA acts ever again. I'm not bothering with another fight until and unless others in the community join, and not on this page- we need a special page for it. And I will be pretty hard on fringies to act without stirring up the animals (I'll let Arritt tell the SPOVers to behave). For that matter, 66.30.77.62, please be civil to SA. He isn't a dumb animal who can't control his behavior, as his principled stand against the CIVILITY policy shows. ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 02:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, SA tells me I should be totally banned from Wikipedia - and when I ask why, that's described by this WP:SPA as an indication that I am 'baiting' him somehow. Just what is the 'bait' that I am supposedly 'dangling' here, 66.30.77.62 (talk · contribs)? Dlabtot (talk) 17:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

66.30.77.62 (talk · contribs) btw, you've said that the reason you used this "anon IP" to place notices about the interview to select editors was because it would be "a bit less polarizing" than using your real identity. I'm not really sure I understand why your simple identity would be considered polarizing, but, why are you continuing to use this "anon IP" (I think the more accurate word is sockpuppet)? Why not just log in and comment under your real account? Dlabtot (talk) 02:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Probably as it's the banned user Davkal. Shot info (talk) 06:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]