[Wikipedia-l] "genetically unequiped" women

Wed Sep 11 14:19:31 UTC 2002

Michael R. Irwin wrote:

>I have not seen him attempt to initiate lynching
>efforts by titling threads such as:
>
>internet kook, etc.
>
(speaking of Mav, I think -- it gets hard to follow so many indents in 
followups)

I've referred to certain newcomers as "crackpots", not "kooks", based 
solely on what they have written in articles, talk pages & meta. Perhaps 
it's offensive that I've judged them and labelled them as such, but it's 
based on their actions and that alone. If their behaviour changes, so 
will my opinion of them.

Saying "X is a kook" or "X cannot properly engage in serious discussion" 
may be considered harsh and offensive. We should perhaps tone that sort 
of thing down -- however, in the case I'm thinking of, myself and others 
wasted a lot of time wrangling with BDJones about relativity. We treated 
him fairly, responded intelligently, tried to see his way of seeing 
things, and after a time it became clear that he is either a) completely 
impervious to reason or b) running circles round us on purpose.
I propose the words "kook" and "crackpot" be used as a shorthand for the 
above scenario, "crackpot" implying a scientific or pseudoscientific 
slant. Fair enough?

That's all a very, very long way from saying "all people of type X are 
kooks".

Adam Williamson wrote:

 > Those who responded to Jaap's post merely exercised their own right 
to freedom of expression. None of them denied Jaap's right to hold such 
an opinion

I do, damn it.

-- tarquin