[WikiEN-l] Quality, neutrality, and perspective: the benefits of RK's bad behavior

Fri Oct 3 10:54:28 UTC 2003

Admittedly, I would have jumped on the bandwagon for his banning when I had 
my first RK experience.
RK has called me a few choice things in the past, but I been discovering 
that RK is an essential part of the Wiki community since his edit wars 
consistently yield the kind of synthesis that we want: quality, neutrality, 
and a unique perspective that highlights what Wiki can offer that other 
sourcebooks cannot.

We should disregard the mountain of grievances we have against him, and 
accept him as an eloquent, forceful representative of a significant share of 
hard-liners on the pro-Israel side, although I would certainly favor banning 
if there were no counterweight. Since these are mass-based struggles, there 
might be a substantive benefit to allowing partisans to engage in struggle 
and yield syntheses, in that we might be better able to deal with the role 
of public opinion, and political mobilization.

Actually, I’ve been noticing that Wikipedia’s have been doing a better job 
of conveying how the two sides see this conflict than the academic 
literature and media articles (Reuters, NY Times, BBC, AP usually) that I 
usually read.

All academic journals, sourcebooks, and media outlets have their strengths 
and weaknesses when weighed against each other. And Wiki offers a unique 
perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute made possible by the dynamics 
of RK and his enemies.  Nothing else available online is going to be 
synthesis of material written by- and also edited by - such a diverse group 
of perspectives (the online medium makes it possible – there might be 
violence if this group were in the same room!). The articles convey all 
facets of reality, being products themselves of an actually 
Israeli-Palestinian proxy battle.

As a disclaimer, as the son of Holocaust survivors I’ll state my solidarity 
with RK’s passions for a strong, secure state of Israel. However, my views 
on his conception of Arab culture are closer to the late Edward Said than 
Daniel Pipes. As a historian, I find myself cringing, and often gasping with 
disbelief, when reading RK’s tracts on the Palestinians, Arabs, or Islam.

Perhaps I can relate to RK’s mentality better than most, but I’ve wedded a 
strong rebuke of RK’s paranoia, obnoxiousness, and bully tactics to a 
defense of the end result.

_________________________________________________________________
Instant message in style with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE!  
http://msnmessenger-download.com