steven l. rubenstein wrote:
But I have to respond to Timwi’s message at length. His very statements
actually exemplify the reason I have made this proposal. To be clear,
although I certainly do believe in the specifics of the proposal, my
main motivation was concern over people’s understanding of our NPOV
policy. I wanted to open up a debate about NPOV, and raise people’s
consciousness about NPOV. As far as I am concerned, what Timwi wrote
proves that he either does not understand, or does not accept, our
NPOV policy, and by itself justifies my proposal.
Well, that's fresh, especially considering that I
* didn't argue about or even mention the NPOV policy;
* didn't accept or reject your proposal;
* don't care what you or anyone think about the NPOV policy;
* notice that several people have tried to point out to you that what
you are advocating here hasn't really anything to do with NPOV.
All I said in my message was that the discussion is stupid.
I think we should have a Dumbest Discussion of the Week award. Or
Deadest Horse of the Week. Or whatever.
Timwi