|
|
|
|
|
|
by egberts1
873 days ago
|
|
|
In the same breath, you say "what's wrong with them", which is just as bad as saying "there is no evidence of it" while emoting obfuscating and cobbling the terms of "moderator", "editor", "contributor" together and confuse the input mechanism of Wikipedianship even further. Wikipedian admins are the worst. While it still isn't perfect, my fight with Wikipedia is over introduction of "Deaf" with capital "D" against editors who have no claim in this culture other than their "preservation culture of preconceived notions". Would take 18 years before I rallied enough Deaf Wikipedian editors to muscle past those "old foggities". Yeah, was triggered so I am putting that tidbit of observational data there. |
|
|
I fail to see why asking for evidence is the same as denial that there is any.
> while emoting obfuscating and cobbling the terms of "moderator", "editor", "contributor" together and confuse the input mechanism of Wikipedianship even further
I’m not sure how I ‘emot[ed]’ anything. There are no Wikipedia ‘moderators’, and I, in good faith, considered the two plausible candidate meanings. I do not see how else one is meant to respond to claims about strictly inextant groups. You yourself now refer to admins, which were one possible group I specified. It is more obfuscatory to use an ambiguous and strictly non-referring term than to specify plausible reinterpretations (admins, editors). It is exceedingly odd to accuse someone who points out a distinction of ‘cobbling[sic]’ what is so distinguished together.
> against editors
This is very confusing. You began by complaining that admins are ‘the worst’. Now you are complaining about editors. Is your complaint that admins unfairly decided on consensus following discussion by editors? If so, it seems that the admins are at fault there.
I’ve lost arguments on Wiki before, and I think the people who disagreed were silly. But that doesn’t indicate much about editors in general, or indeed Wiki procedures. What would be generally damning is if the cases you have in mind were to show that the admins are systematically and unfairly predisposed one way or another.