Talk:Legal status of Hawaii/Archive 2

POV Edits
Jere:Sorry Laualoha, I think your edits went too far on several fronts. Heading out to dinner, but I'll touch upon specifics when I return.

Also, AFAIK, there is no "Anti-Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement" - people who oppose independence of Hawaii, especially based on racial terms, believe that all Hawaiians of all ethnicities already have sovereignty as equal participants in the State of Hawaii and the United States of America. It sounds like a POV term like "anti-abortion" or "anti-choice". --JereKrischel 01:09, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Laualoha:Hmmm...couldʻve fooled me by the guys I saw at the last several hearings I attended. The movement you claim does not exist is also, uh, online; e.g. The Anti-Hawaiian Sovereignty Web Page.  The Committee of Safety supposedly did not exist either, but, well...been there, done that...!


 * Jere:Technical note - you can make responses easier to discern by using ":" to indent. Multiple ":" make for more indentations.


 * Certainly that "Anti-Hawaiian Sovereignty Web Page" doesn't represent anything more than a single person's blogging :). Again, casting about an "anti-" term the other way ("anti-equality sovereignty movement", "anti-non-native sovereignty movement", "anti-american sovereignty movement") really just appeals to name calling. --JereKrischel 03:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Laualoha:Single personʻs blogging, huh?What are these, then:

Laualoha 15:00, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Jere:Well, the grassroot institute of Hawaii is a non-profit conservative think tank. Ken Conklin has some notoriety beyond an anonymous geocities blogger due to his involvement in fighting race-based elections in OHA, and running (unsuccessfully) for a seat, heritage.org is also a conservative think tank, and Hawaii Matters is a website regarding Twigg-Smith's book "Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the facts matter?".  That being said, maybe the Anti-Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement based on the geocities webpage will become more popular and organized - but for now, it seems simply like a lite, anonymous, personal position page.  Can you see the difference? --JereKrischel 16:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Laualoha:Sorry, but I still disagree wih your (re?) edits also, as they are certainly very POV. I think we are going to have to work on this one, huh?  Until then, Iʻd appreciate it if you would not overturn my edits (I think the cliche for that is "pot calling the kettle black", or something like that) unless you can first specify some problem with them, preferably one that you are not committing yourself.  Itʻs one thing to correct misinformation, but thatʻs not what happened, & I really donʻt want to get sucked into an overturning-without-justification dual here.  Weʻre both intelligent people AND parents, so I think we got a few better things to do, huh?


 * Have a good dinner. Aloha, Laualoha 01:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Jere:Let's see what we can do about addressing our detailed concerns. Please see my comments below.  Mahalo! --JereKrischel 03:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)