User talk:BramptonSTI

Gor
Your contribution to article "Gor" is unfortunately a big indigestible paragraph which doesn't really comply with preferred Wikipedia practices. Ideally, it should be boiled down to what is most directly relevant and useful, and then added to the Gorean article (rather than "Gor"). I've been kind of letting it slide so far, but if it becomes the object of an edit war, then I'll take a hand... AnonMoos (talk) 08:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your criticism of my paragraph AnonMoos, but the supported documentation not being digestible to you seems a very bias argument. The information given is a reasonable and supported case against an ubsubstantiated agendas (including feminism). Why is it accepted for stones to be cast at the gorean ethos, yet unacceptable to offer substantiated reply ? I attempted to be reasonable. The comment accompanying the removal of the paragraph stated it should be a separate paragraph, albeit said in snide tones. If my literary skill is lacking and you are truely objective, then I ask for your help in putting forward a paragraph that counters unfair and discriminitive views from persons with agendas of their own. In the meantime I will do my best to rectify the issues that you mention, although you should feel ashamed for your aloof and arrogant comments. It hardly comes across as objective and only serves to cast doubt on your objectivity and agenda. It is all well and good to have decent writing skills, but that is no excuse for allowing bias and inaccuracy. Surely the truth of the subject matter should be respected ? Where you allow stones to be cast from people with agendas, there must be a right of reply, so either the criticisms should stay but both sides allowed, or the criticisms not levelled in the first place. I do not want to put a 'view' forward, however, the critical 'view' has been accepted. At least the reply has substantiating evidence. All I'm looking for is fairness AnonMoos. Don't tell me some are more equal or 'fair' than others ? Instead of dismissing my literary skill so off-handedly, perhaps you could show some depth of character and actually help in a constructive way, rather than threatening action ? BramptonSTI (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)