User talk:Avidor/archive

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Here are a few more good links for to help you get started:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- Longhair 23:37, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

PRT Page Mediation
Hi. A request was made recently that an ongoing controversy regarding the PRT article be mediated to a mutually-satisfactory conclusion. I have read the other editor's thoughts on the problem as well as shifting through the article's history. I'd like to hear, if possible, what you think of the dispute and what you think ought to be done with the article. A response, question, or comment can be left on my talk page. Thanks! KrazyCaley 08:50, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I replied and the message was removed.

Avidor 18:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

The blanking on my talk page has been reverted, and I have read your comments. It seems that many of your concerns are being addressed as we speak. (Language changes from "PRT is" to "proponents say PRT can be", for instance). The article does have a rather paltry criticism section; perhaps we could create a larger one that deals more in-depth with PRT critiques.

Just generally, since you're coming at it from a rather strong anti-PRT viewpoint, and others have equally strong pro-PRT viewpoints, continue trying to hash out changes to the article that everyone can agree on via the talk page before actually making such changes.

And also try not to worry too much about the NPOV tag. It's not a matter of urgency that it be up there; I'm going to put it up and hopefully it will remain there until we can reach a consensus. KrazyCaley/That's Krazy Talk  21:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, KC,


 * Good luck.

Avidor 21:30, 2 February 2006 (UTC)


 * No worries. Let me know if you need anything else, and best of luck with the PRT article. KrazyCaley/That's Krazy Talk  06:43, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

New discussion up on the PRT talk page. KrazyCaley/That's Krazy Talk  08:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm... Skyloop again. If Skyloop is still "being considered" as a preferred mode of transportation by the OKI folks, I think we'll also have to entertain the notion that the Titanic is still afloat and making regular crossings of the Atlantic...

Really, Wikipedia should be ashamed to carry this bizarre article... how about this howler:

"Using PRT could let an impoverished yet technical country leap-frog past many more-developed countries' congestion, safety and pollution problems."

Yeah...sure...

To understand what's going on here, read Teach the Controversy. The Libertarian transit-haters writing the PRT article are saying there is a controversy among transit professionals about PRT when there is none, just as the intelligent design people at the Discovery Institute say there is a controversy in the scientific community about evolution. In fact, the Discovery Institute has promoted PRT as well as IT.

I'm outah here also. Here's where to find me: ... and here

Avidor 17:31, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Minor block
Per voting and your WP:FAITH edits, I have decided to block you for fifteen minutes as a "slap on the wrist". Please contribute in an all-positive manner. &mdash; Deckill e r 23:47, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Look, I blocked you for three hours, so I don't want to have to extend the block and/or go to WP:RFAr or something along those lines. Please cease any bad faith edits after the brief block expires. Thanks. &mdash; Deckill e r 00:04, 22 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, if you want to speak against this block, you can still edit this page. If you provide a case of some sort, I or some other admin will take it into account. &mdash; Deckill e r 00:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Like the Wikipedia page on John Siegenthaler Senior, The Wikipedia Page on "Personal Rapid Transit" Spreads disinformation.



PRT is a scam and a hoax... like "Intelligent Design".

In fact PRT is promoted by some of the same people who promote Intelligent Design.


 * Where the hell is that "fact"??? Fresheneesz 23:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC) (see below)

PRT is used as a wedge to stop transit projects. This Wikipedia page is being used as part of that anti-transit effort.

This disinformation campaign has real effects in the real world... Bogus PRT companies have sold stock to investors and legislators have appropriated scarce public funds for PRT "research" that has gone nowhere. Countless hours of time has been wasted in meetings by the PRT proponents.

When I complained before, I was told to learn how to use Wikipedia and air my complaints on the discussion page.

You can go there to see the results... I tried it your way and it didn't work.

Most transit professionals are too busy for this PRT nonsense. Avidor (dated below)


 * Most transit professionals are involved with running *current* systems, this is obvious. In the same way that most transit professionals are too busy to work on bullet trains. Fresheneesz 23:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Clearly, Wikipedia can't stop a small group of determined con-artists and crackpots from creating fiction and calling it fact. Avidor (dated below)


 * Theres a large group of us "con-artists" who are probably making millions from our wikipedia scame. And billions at the national level! You're on crack. Fresheneesz 23:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Avidor 03:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Unblock
I'll unblock as long as you don't edit the PRT page. Please focus in the mediation. The block has almost expired anyway, but I'll go ahead. &mdash; Deckill e r 03:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC) --

Mediation didn't work the last time.

The mediators gave up. Can't say I blame them after getting this treatment



I suggest the Personal Rapid Transit page be given special consideration given the controversy.

Find some real transportation engineers and transit organizations and get their definition of PRT.

Avidor 13:01, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

DISCOVERY INSTITUTE & PRT

These are blogs that give background on the Discovery Institute's support for Intelligent Design and equally bogus Intelligent Transportation like Personal Rapid Transit:





This Discovery Institute page describes a presentation they hosted for PRT

Too bad Wikipedia isn't as skeptical of PRT and its promoters as it is of Discovery Institute and Intelligent Design

Reply
Hey there; as an administrator, I'm forced to remain neutral, though if you click on the mediation page, any of the mediators listed on that list specialize in mediations. I guarentee that you won't get blocked over this issue by me ever again. &mdash; Deckill e r 18:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

How do I defend myself? Who is in charge at Wikipedia?
(From User talk:Essjay:) The Wikipedia mediation/arbitration process isn't clear to me.

I don't have a lot of time to learn the complicated system you have to resolve disputes at Wikipedia.

I am mentioned by name in the Wikipedia personal rapid transit article and attacked by name on the PRT Talk page and my Talk page and other Wikipedia pages by anonymous authors.

This is what those anonymous authors have said about me:

"You're on crack." 

"Avidor's psychotic interjections "

"Unreasonable, destructive, irrational, unwilling to debate changes. This is Avidor's history on Wikipedia"

"...his actions are based in mental illness rather than reason."

One of these anonymous accusers has made these statements about me to mediators:

"So now you're bowing out ,eh? You went in and empowered that fucking idiot and now you're dropping it on the floor. You are as much a moron as he is. "



"Avidor is an 'extremist'."



Why do you allow anonymous authors to post this stuff?


 * Yet, it's okay for you to call them "con-artists and crackpots"??

Like John Seigenthaler Sr., I think I deserve to have a chance to clear my name and have this dispute resolved as quickly as possible.

Who at Wikipedia is accountable? Who is in charge?

Thank you,

Ken Avidor

Avidor 14:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


 * In the navagation bar, directly below the Wikipedia logo on the left, is a link that says "Contact Wikipedia." Clicking on that will direct you to a number of options, one of which is the OTRS information queue, [mailto:info-en@wikimedia.org info-en@wikimedia.org]. If you contact the OTRS helpdesk, they will direct you to a contact with the foundation who can solve your problem. Alternatively, you may contact the Foundation Office in Florida directly; contact information for the Foundation office can be found here. Essjay Talk • Contact 21:20, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Complaint about the dispute resolution process

 * I moved your complaint from the main page (where it has no place) to the complaints page: Wikipedia_talk:Mediation_Cabal/Complaints_archive
 * I avoid a vandalism warning only because it isn't technically vandalism to modify WP:MEDCAB.
 * --Fasten 09:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Libel
I guess what you are looking for is Libel:
 * If you believe that you are the subject of a libellous statement on Wikipedia, ...

--Fasten 16:07, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Greets
Hi Avidor. I think the time has come to take a deep breath and chill. I am going to archive the Talk at Personal Rapid Transit, and I'd advise you to consider archiving your Talk as well (ask me how if you don't know). What's past is past, and your best bet for deflecting future criticism is to rise majestically above it :-) Assuming you are the Ken Avidor you will be well aware that "the truth" is in the eye of the beholder - in the case of the PRT article I think many of the criticisms you raise are valid, should and will be included, but by rising to the bait you make it harder to get your point across.  Contrary to what anybody might say, you are welcome there as every Wikipedian is awlays welcome on any article where they have knowledge to impart (unless, of course, ArbCom says otherwise).  Just zis Guy you know? 11:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I will add this caution: you have used some intemerate language in the past, both on Talk and in edit summaries. I have asked Skybum not to do this, I will ask you as well. What's past is past. Just zis Guy you know? 17:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC) -- I am very happy that much of the promotional language and the weasel words have been removed.

Thanks. Avidor 12:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)