User talk:Davodd/Archive 8

Cleaned February 2, 2005. To add comments click on the + in the tab at the top of this page.

Your continuing unethical behavior will not be tolerated
David - I am confused about your erratic and destructive behavior. You have hijacked the ON24 wiki and refuse to allow community memebs with expert information to edit the page. You have reverted several times from an accurate, fact-based listing to your posting which contains several important and clear factual inaccuracies. Your posting contains numerous factual errors which have been pointed out to you at length. You consider yourself a journalist, but to insist on publishing false information breaks the most basic ethical and journalistic code.

You appear to be pushing a gay rights agenda by your inclusion of the false claim that ON24 financial news was distributed via gay.com. It's difficult to understand how a journalist would purposefully pursue pushing this false claim. You worked here at ON24 briefly about four years ago. I believe you would agree that the people here have more current and accurate information about ON24 than you do from your distant vantage place. Also, the claim that the news organization was shut down due to terrorism is both irrelevant and false.

Your decision to block ON24 from editing the ON24 page is an abuse of power and another example of your poor decision-making. I believe you, not ON24, should be prohibited from editing the ON24 wiki given your refusal to allow community edits, and your insistance on posting demonstrably false claims.

Examples of intentionally false postings: the web conferencing section of the page. You have set up the page into 2 equal sections, one for "history" (which you would want to include only the brief history as a financial news source) and one for "web conferencing". I have explained to you that ON24 does not offer financial news, and ON24 does not offer web conferencing services. What then is your motive for removing accurate, current, factual information about ON24, and replacing it with false, agenda-driven falsehoods?

ON24 has been autoblocked by you for posting in, what in your opinion is a PR style. However, only facts are included in the listing you would have blocked. Indeed, your listing is full of inaccuracies - items you know to be false but insist on re-publishing. I ask you again, which of us should be blocked from editing this page?

I will continue to work to have your grip on this page released - I will work to have you relieved of your administrative duties based on your willfull and disrespectful violations of the spirit and regulations of this project. I do not know what drives you to violate the ON24 page, but your recent actions are shameful and undercut your claims to journalistic integrity.

You shouldn't have started a page if you aren't comfortable with others editing its content. Do the right thing David and leave the ON24 page edits to people who know the facts.
 * Thank you for your concerns. Your arguments would be more effective if, 1) they were more true than false, and 2) if you ever edited any page other than the ON24 article. I in no way "hijacked" any article. I merely reverted what appeared to be destructive edits. In the future, if you disagree with another editor's contributions, there are ways aside from deleting their work wholesale. This includes using the article's discussion page and the editor's user talk page to talk things out in a collaborative manner before picking a fight. Please read Civility, Wikipedia etiquette, and Writers' rules of engagement. Davodd 04:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S.ON24 content on gay.com -> Google cached page. Davodd 04:34, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Hopkins School
Hopkins School is up for peer review, and anything you could note as a member of WP:Schools would be appreciated! Thanks! Staxringold 11:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note! Any chance you could give it even a small once-over as you suggested? Staxringold 22:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

COTW Project
You voted for History of the World Wide Web, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article. PDXblazers 19:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Goth GA Nom
Dear Davodd, your recent nomination for Goth to be promoted to good article status has failed on various grounds which have been listed on the article's talk page. Please expand on these comments and re-apply for Good Article Status. Thank you for contributing, keep up the good work, Highway 22:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC) Please see Me... and do pennanceFra nkB 09:10, 9 April 2006 (UTC)