QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 9th September 2009, 7:05pm)
Y'know, it would be better for all concerned if the pro-Wikipedia folks here would stop referring to Mr. Victim here in such derogatory terms. The mere fact that his writing skills are somewhat below the WR average does not make him a "moron" or an "idiot," and given his overall purpose, his Wikipedia activities are hardly "idiotic" or even "trolling." If anything, Wikipedians are the ones who are "trolling" - they're trolling local politics, from pretty much all over the world, anonymously.
Seriously, who's to say that the person inserting negative information about someone in your local state legislature election isn't some sort of international terrorist or criminal? You only have that person's word for it, don't you? In the pre-internet era, this sort of thing was extremely difficult to do. Now, it's not only easy, Wikipedia actually makes it free of charge.
I don't agree with Mr. Victim's politics at all, in fact I despise them, but he has a very good reason to be angry. Local elections should be decided by local citizens. If outsiders want to try to influence them, that's fine - but it should be absolutely clear where they come from and what their agenda is. Wikipedia's ubiquity and ridiculously overranked search-engine footprint makes it too tempting a vehicle, and its support for anonymity (and failure to recognize POV-pushing, especially when it's done by admins) makes it all damn near impossible, at least as far as the internet is concerned.
For the record this my politics in a nut shell as it it outlined below....
am a life long Republican. I happen to lean towards a libertarian point of view.
This is what I believe in my politics:
1. I believe the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person's dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be honored.
2. I believe in equal rights, equal justice and opportunity for all, regardless of race, sex, creed, age or disability.
3. I believe free enterprise and encouraging individual initiative have brought this nation opportunity, economic growth and prosperity.
4. I believe government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of what they earn.
5. I believe the proper role of government is to provide for the people only those critical functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and that the best government is that which governs least.
6. I believe the most effective, responsible and responsive government is government closest to the people.
7. I believe Americans must retain principles that have made us strong while developing new and innovative ideas to meet the challenges of the times.
8. I believe Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom and human rights throughout the world or (Za wolność Waszą i Naszą)
.......
IF you, Somey, as, I would assume are a libral, then these ideas seemhateful to you... So be it. I did not get a fancy, public subsidized education from an "elite" institution. NO, I have a "street education" and realize, what is right and works and what is wrong and don't work. And I can tell you this, I have seen the UNION THUGS at work, I HAVE SEEN the vote fraud, and I have seen the RAT FUCKING and the like, and I have come to the conclusion that there is only four types of Democrats (at lest in Illinois politics), they are as follows:
LIAR, THIEF, THUG, and last and not lest,
THE NAIVE IDIOT. .
Now what is most disturbing is to me is the liberal have double standards, in regards to how they push POV on Wikipedia, Make no mistake, Gamaliel is the most aggressive, ruthless POLITICAL POV PUSHERS on Wikipedia. I DESPISE HIM. Not for his politics, as we, at lest for now in USA, still have the right to disagree with democrats, but it's the way he goes about it... the BRUTAL LYING, and THUGGERY, and complete lack of accountability and the enabling by Wikipedia, to Gamaliel's agenda. This is why I would love to push his face in if I can. IT S the WIKIPEDIOT intellectual violence which is so egregious and with out control.
Wikipedia should tread lightly, as the USA plunging in to a state were peoples lives are ruined, they will go after things like the main stream media and place like Wikipedia. It has happened in the past and can happen in the future.
And rate, TO ROB (GAMALIEL) YOUR A LITTLE BOY COWARD AND I SPIT ON YOU.
LATE ADDITION... a primer of the wikiway of getting your way.
How to Ban a POV you Dislike, in 9 Easy Steps
1. Do your best to bait, prod, and aggravate somebody on the opposing side of an ideological war from yourself into acting uncivil out of frustration with you. If you have friends, get together with them to gang up on your opponents and get them angry and desperate.
2. When the opponent finally does something that can be construed as a violation of policy, get a friendly admin to block him/her.
3. When the blocked editor uses the means still available to him/her, such as his/her talk page and the e-mail feature, to complain about the unfairness of the block, get your admin friend to bind and gag the editor by removing talk page posting and e-mailing privileges for "trolling" and "harassment".
4. With the editor forcibly silenced and thus unable to speak in his/her defense, hold a lynch mob ban discussion on WP:AN/I, with your friends once again ganging up. This works best when the blocked user lacks friends to gang up on his/her behalf; if that happens, you'd really have drama, but if there aren't any, you'll just get an open-and-shut case where you and your friends say "Burn the witch!" "Ban him/her already!", and a handful of people who like to see a good lynching banning and hang out on that forum for that purpose weigh in too.
5. Now that an editor representing the POV you oppose is banned, make the banned editor into a bogeyman responsible for all that is wrong with Wikipedia, claiming that everything that editor believes in is a "fringe belief" or a "harassment meme", and that no tactic is too extreme to counter this grave threat. They should block all IP addresses in Upper Slobbovia if that's where they think the banned editor is editing from!
6. If anybody else shows up with similar opinions on any subject to the banned editor, try to accuse him/her of being a sockpuppet. If that won't stick, call him/her a meatpuppet and claim that he/she is proxying for the banned editor, and that everything they edit needs to be reverted on sight.
7. If they call this treatment unfair, block or ban them too.
8. The larger the body count from the serial banning of advocates of this particular POV gets, the easier it will be to summarily ban anybody new who shows up; just cite the "serial harassment" allegedly committed by people allegedly associated with the new editor.
9. Profit!!!!!!!!