Am 18.10.2011 01:54, schrieb Thomas Morton: > On 17 Oct 2011, at 09:19, Tobias Oelgarte > <tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Am 16.10.2011 21:27, schrieb ???: >>> On 16/10/2011 19:36, Tobias Oelgarte wrote: >>>> Am 16.10.2011 16:17, schrieb ???: >>>>> On 16/10/2011 14:50, David Gerard wrote: >>>>>> On 16 October 2011 14:40, ???<wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Don't be an arsehole you get the same sort of stuff if you search for >>>>>> Presumably this is the sort of quality of discourse Sue was >>>>>> complaining about from filter advocates: provocateurs lacking in >>>>>> empathy. >>>>>> >>>>> Trolling much eh David? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But thanks for showing once again your incapacity to acknowledge that >>>>> searching for sexual images and seeing such images, is somewhat >>>>> different, from searching for non sexual imagary and getting sexual >>>>> images. >>>>> >>>> I have to agree with David. Your behavior is provocative and >>>> unproductive. I don't feel the need to respond to your arguments at all, >>>> if you write in this tone. You could either excuse yourself for this >>>> kind of wording, or we are done. >>>> >>> Now you wouldn't be complainng about seeing content not to your liking >>> would you. What are you going to do filter out the posts? Bet your glad >>> your email provider added that option for you. >>> >>> Yet another censorship hipocrite. >> I guess you did not understand my answer. Thats why I'm feeling free to >> respond one more time. >> >> I have no problem with any kind of controversial content. Showing >> progress of fisting on the mainpage? No problem for me. Reading your >> comments? No problem for me. Reading your insults? Also no problem. The >> only thing i did, was the following: I told you, that i will not react >> any longer to your comments, if they are worded in the manner as they >> currently are. >> >> Literary: I'm feeling free to open your book and start to read. If it is >> interesting and constructive i will continue to read it and i will >> respond to you to share my thoughts. If it is purely meant to insult, >> without any other meaning, then i will get bored and fly over the lines, >> reading only the half or less. I also have no intention to share my >> thoughts with the author of this book. Why? I have nothing to talk >> about. Should i complain over it's content? Which content anyway? >> >> Give it a try. Make constructive arguments and explain your thoughts. >> There is no need for strong-wording, if the construction of the words >> itself is strong. >> >> nya~ > And that is a mature and sensible attitude. > > Some people do not share your view and are unable to ignore what to > them are rude or offensive things. > > Are they wrong? > > Should they be doing what you (and I) do? > > Tom The question is, if we should support "them" to not even try to start this learning progress. It's like saying: "That is all you have to know. Don't bother with the rest, it is not good for you."
nya~ _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l