--- Mark Gallagher
<m.g.gallagher(a)student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
Well, folks and folkettes, we always have a long
wait for these things,
but it looks like we've finally found another
violation of WP:POINT.
Since when does WP:POINT trump WP:NPOV? I will never
apologise for "violating" POINT if its to make a stand
for NPOV - particularly in light of a leadership
vacuum wherin clear NPOV violations are by "consensus"
allowed to stand.
For what it's worth, I do agree with you:
[[Category:Anti-Semitic
people]] a) does not appear to serve a useful
purpose, b) is not exactly
neutral, c) could well be described as a lawsuit
waiting to happen, if
applied improperly.
I disagree with the lawsuit paranoia, and dislike is
usage as a crutch in arguments wherin a plain
application of basic bonehead-level NPOV will suffice.
Your agreement is noted, but is it counted?
You could do with being a little less strident about
it, though. Your
comment on that TfD wasn't going to change anyone's
mind: it looks quite
logical to someone who already agrees with you, but
that's not as
beneficial as you might think.
I dont know what else to say. Either we have a culture
which respects NPOV or we do not.
Regards,
SV
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com