[WikiEN-l] Eliezer is not a suitable administrator

Fri Jan 27 11:02:11 UTC 2006

sorry i accidently sent more than one message.  it wasn't clear to me
that my first message got through.  now i know better how to use this
tool (i think).

in response to your e-mail, you gave one of six incidents i observed this
past week where Eliezer silenced a dissenting voice.  most of them
involved different users.  let me focus upon my own problem with
Eliezer.  he currently has me under a 24-hour block because he claims i
violated the 3rr rule (though the 3rr rule permits me to revert vandalism
by OpenInfo.  e.g. "he claims to be from the knesset" "opinion of ONE
israeli", etc. instead of permitting me to entitle my own comments
"reason for alert" and the like)  if i violated the 3rr rule, then so did
OpenInfo and the 3rr rule specifies Eliezer must apply the rule fairly to
all offending parties.  Eliezer deleted my tags, blocked me without
warning and did not block OpenInfo.  what's the difference between
OpenInfo and me?  OpenInfo shares Eliezer's anti-messianic agenda and
admits on the talk page that he supports outreach judaism - an
anti-messianic group.  i expressed the mainstream voice of judaism that
is pluralistic.

on this same note, i tagged the alert and went to the talk page to
explain the reason for my tag.  as i was typing part 2 of my reason,
Eliezer blocked me.  my full explanation never saw the light of day.  the
partial explanation i managed to get onto the talk page was ignored by
Eliezer and criticized by OpenInfo.  this certainly does not represent
the voice of the community who watches this article.

(please note: i never stated that i personally sibscribe to any of the
above-mentioned views.  Eliezer and OpenInfo ASSUME i'm expressing my own
religious views.  while i have my own religious convictions this forum is
not the appropriate place since all of us are supposedly neutral.)

finally, your question about the messianic jews executed during the
spanish inquisions is a valid question (though i never got the chance to
address that issue either in the article or on the talk page.)  the
inquisions exclusively tagerted jews who were in the church - i.e. jews
who confessed belief in Jesus.  while the majority of jews in spain at
that time refused to join the church or confess belief in Jesus, the
spaniards focused exclusively on jews within the church.  they rounded up
1500, killed 500 who refused to renounce their jewish identity while
believing in Jesus and released 1,000 under a death threat who agreed to
renounce their jewish identity while believing in Jesus (at least
publicly).  did the term "messianic jew" exist at the time?  no.  by
PROPER definition, were their religious beliefs and practices consistant
with messianic judaism or hebrew christianity?  they certainly weren't
behaving like orthodox jews (though they could have).  if we apply a
consistant and fair logic, then the article inaccurately asserts
messianic judaism "began" in the 1860's and came from the church of
england.  the term "messianic jew" didn't exist at that time, either. 
we'd have to say messianic judaism started in the 1970's when the
movement adopted the name and was clearly in full swing for a long time. 
if we more appropriately analyze the CHARACTERISTICS of messianic
judaism, then we find this unique religious expression has existed 2,000
(which predates christianity by over 300 years).  we further discover
messianic judaism has always existed over the past 2,000 years - whether
in large or small numbers.

give unbiased third parties who have done over 10 years research into
messianic judaism a voice in this article and i believe the end result
will be an article that preserves the intrigrity of wikipedia and does
not serve the radical agenda of Eliezer and OpenInfo.

  Message: 7
  Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 09:32:05 +0100
  From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm
  Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Eliezer is not a suitable administrator
  To: English Wikipedia
  Message-ID:

  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

  Sending one message to the list is quite enough.
  If you are talking about reversions like
  http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Messianic_Judaism&diff=36540336&oldid=36537686
  then
  Eliezer was quite right to make them. Articles are about facts, and
  questioning the validity of any of them, should happen on the talk
  page.

  Where and when did you post those concerns on the talk page? Just
  tagging is
  not enough.
  I've seen several people tag the article as totally disputed without
  putting
  any discussion on the talk page.

  It would help a lot of you posted diff links to the edits you are
  referring
  to see WP:DIFF.

  About the first editorial comment. If the article says Messianic
  Judaism
  started in the 1800s, then are you sure Judaism was actually called
  Messianic in the 1490s? Jews may have died during Crusades or at the
  hands
  of Queen Isabelle, but they may simply be a completely different form
  of
  Judaism altogether.

  Mgm

  On 1/26/06, david weiss wrote:
  >
  > eliezer imposes an unfair, seriously biased and inaccurate article
  > dealing with messianic judaism. when i had previously raised my
  concerns
  > in the discussion page and point out the gross misinformation in
  the main
  > article, eliezar would delete my tag. (as a side note, i observed
  others
  > tag this article as violating the npov policy only to have their
  tags
  > deleted without explanation.)
  >
  > i expressed my concerns on the talk page, only to be vandalised by
  > OpenInfo and blocked by Eliezer. Eliezer prevented me from
  explaining:
  > 1. where the npov policy was violated in several places; 2. show
  where
  > the facts were seriously inaccurate and, 3. show where the author
  > contradicted himself. eliezer blocked me without sufficient warning
  per
  > the blocking policy.
  >
  > while i strongly disagree with eliezer's anti-messianic agenda, i
  do not
  > feel i vandalized the article or site in any way. this site's
  policy
  > allows me the freedom to edit articles that violate the npov in a
  good
  > faith effort to make them more accurate.
  >
  > i believe eliezer will only force his anti-messianic agenda upon
  the
  > public and a new administrator needs to be appointed who will
  fairly
  > address the topic. thank you for your prompt and open-minded
  attention
  > to this matter.

-- 
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/