Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Race and intelligence/Workshop: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Proposed remedies: clearer |
|||
Line 1,921:
::::: That would be Mathsci. One can even disagree strenuously and engage in pointed dialog and still show respect for editors of a different viewpoint. (Not to mention his treatment of someone who editorially generally agrees with him seems not much better should they attempt dialog with said editors.) In fact, Mathsci does not even know if I agree with him editorially{{mdash}}after all, our only disagreement so far has been over the value of a particular source, which he regards as not particularly useful but I found quite valuable. Nevertheless, he has dredged up EEML and filed innuendo at evidence that I (''his'' use of quotes) have quote-unquote "stated" R&I has been a life-long interest. Not to mention other disparaging remarks along the way against myself and against editors from his past conflicts who are not even involved at R&I, all the while repeatedly self-congratulating himself on his masterful Clavier-Übung III. (He's not the only one here who plays classical organ or who has a brain larger than a pea. However, I don't feel a need to engage in{{mdash}}this could be my perception only{{mdash}}offensively supercilious and irrelevant self-promotion.) <small>I attribute the prior parenthetical remark to insufficient morning coffee (I prefer a mild roast for more caffeine) but do not retract the observation. </small> [[User:Vecrumba|P<small>ЄTЄRS</small> <s>J</s> V<small>ЄСRUМВА</small>]]<small> ►[[User_talk:Vecrumba|TALK]]</small> 13:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
::::::Yep, that’s who I figured it was, and who the rest of us feel this way about also. At this point, the number of editors who regard Mathsci as disruptively uncivil is in the double digits. Offhand, I can’t think of 10 people who’ve expressed this view: you, me, DJ and Varoon Arya (both of whom have
::::::What I think is especially noteworthy about this is that the problems resulting from Mathsci’s incivility are something agreed upon by people involved in this article regardless of which hypothesis they favor about the cause of the IQ gap. David.Kane, Mikemikev and I are generally thought of as “pro-hereditarian” editors (although I’m not sure if that’s really accurate in my and David’s case), while ImperfectlyInformed and Ludwigs2 are both clearly pro-environmental. As for you, Rvcx, and Xxianthippe, if you have opinions about which hypothesis is more likely to be true, you haven’t expressed them strongly enough for me to know what they are. All of us don’t agree on very much, but we agree about Mathsci.
| |||