User talk:Asad112/Archives/2012/July

Just a note, friend.
'You ought to find your utter hypocrisy quite damning.'

I don't think we should ever use language like that before arbitration. It could easily be refactored. You're absolutely right that there is, all too frequently, no consistency from page to page on what an editor thinks is policy. Editors stretch RS when they like the info, and are extremely restrictive in its interpretation when they dislike the information. It is true that it very much looks like hypocrisy. It is also possibly just a matter of not having a coherent mind or set of principles on things like this. In any case, rephrasing that along the lines of 'Coherence and consistency in applying the rules is expected of us. The two instances here suggest double standards, which I'm sure we all agree, is not productive of the sort of quality we desire in here' etc.

Sorry to be a nuisance. I made this mistake often myself in the past, and at times even now, on first impulse when provoked, that kind of language comes to mind, but I try to reformulate things neutrally. Cheers, Asad. And, that link you gave me to Bir-Zeit is invaluable. Nishidani (talk) 14:29, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You're right. Be it true or not, I will resist the urge in future comments. Thanks Nish. -asad (talk) 14:32, 6 July 2012 (UTC)