User:Suigetsu/Incivility gets you nowhere

"I know there's no point in telling you this, but it is possible to disagree with someone without being sarcastic, without being insincere, without swearing at them, without shouting and name-calling and making everyone around you feel as unpleasant as you possibly can. Everyone here does it all the time. People disagree with rules, and oppose merges, and make good changes. (I've been here for almost three years: the rules do in fact change.) You obviously are not that person, and that's fine. Go ahead and don't believe a blessed word I say. Be offended. Take it all as blatant, mocking fakery. You're completely wrong about me, but it doesn't matter, because you're also a troll. Hate my guts and hate Wikipedia too, but know this: one of the rules that we spineless lemmings mindlessly follow is that people, like you, who prove themselves incapable of disagreeing without ramping right into overt, ferocious hostility are blocked from editing, because they don't do anyone or anything any good. So. You can either stop abusing everyone and start expressing yourself rationally, or you can not participate in the project at all. Go ahead and tell all your friends what elitist tyrants we are; it doesn't matter. The simple truth is that you're a mean-spirited person and there is no room here for those."

- Masamage

It is perfectly fine and understandable to disagree with Wikipedia editors on something. This is actually quite commonplace among many editors; just look at the talk page of WP:FICT. Heck, it's also perfectly fine to disagree with the merging of an article, or deletion of an article, or creation of an article, or the editing of an article, whatever. When faced with such a situation, you will probably go to the article's talk page and start a discussion voicing your opinions. Here's where it gets tricky, though: you have to do this without being a dick; in discussions and debates in Wikipedia, incivility gets you nowhere.