User talk:Pedant/2006-09-28

Short message/Long message
Leave short messages here or if you have a really long message please post it here and sign here.

Helpful links
A synopsis of Wikipedia policies can be useful. If you have a problem, it helps to know what the relevant policy is. A gentle introduction to 'why we have rules when even the rules can be edited by anybody' can be found at Pillars of the Community.

Don't let 'problems' with other editors become disputes. Other editors are working on the same article you are for a reason... you have something in common! Instead of an edit war, try collaboration and maybe you will find some valuable help in improving the article. Those other editors are your colleagues, they deserve the same respect and assistance as you do.

NOTICE
I try to handle adovocacy cases very informally (I have never needed to go beyond a brief advocacy process in any of my cases) in an effort to reach a resolution as quickly as possible without undue stress for those concerned. If you see me making comments on discussion pages, for articles which I have not edited, I may be doing so as part of the advocacy process. I might express opinions which are not necessarily my personal opinions sometimes because of this. User:Pedant

Archived Talk
Archive 1 2004-11-19/Archive 2 2004-11-24/Archive 3 2005-01-14/Archive 4 2005-02-27/Archive 5 2006-03-22/Archive 6 2006-08-19/Archive 7 2006-08-19

Category tool
Using: you can place a Category Tree, rooted in any category, on a page:

Juxtaposition of user boxes
=Messages:=

re: Welcome to Esperanza!
Ah, you're right, it was only yesterday! Sorry... been so busy out there lately, stuff is rolling into one :p I like what you've done with your userpage, by the way. Hey, can you tell me some stuff about AMA? What do you guys actually do? The project page was a leeeetle vague... &mdash; riana_dzasta wreak havoc''' 14:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Right-o, thanks for that [magnificently thorough] reply! It sounds like you're doing good work. I'm reducing my Wikitime over the next few weeks, but I should be back in a few fortnights, and might take a closer look at what you do. &mdash; riana_dzasta wreak havoc''' 15:16, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

A ha ha
Clever bar there on your userpage. Although, might it inspire some advocees to think you're picking on them/mean or whatnot? -- \/\/slack (talk) 20:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Fastest Responce Ever
Yeah, that's great. -- \/\/slack (talk) 23:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

URLs on obesity
I see Belleriviere was not quite happy with my revert and less still with Nunquam Dormio's spamwarning.

Medical articles are frequently enriched with links to sites that are maintained by private individuals, professional or layperson. I have a personal ruleset in selecting links, and find that consensus is easily reached on what links are appropriate. In the case of physiciandigest (which is Belleriviere's admitted own page), I was prompted to revert by the fact that it was not supported by a professional organisation (and hence not auhoritative); I mistook the formatting for Google ads (and hence called it "ad-supported" in error). Gripe pages (which this obviously isn't) fall outside my ruleset unless they have independent notability. I maintain that these criteria fall within the spirit (if not the letter) of the external links policy.

While this site is probably useful for doctors with an interest in obesity, I don't think it is suitable for articles intended for the general public, especially when one can choose from much higher-quality authoritative resources such as the NHLBI, the CDC and the WHO.

I'm always happy to discuss particular links on the article's own talkpage, where authors with an interest in the subject will be able to judge whether it is suitable for inclusion.

Compliments for your AMA work, and thanks for your compliment on my medical contributions. JFW | T@lk  22:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the link other than that if we allow this one, we'll have 500 more blog-like "information" pages added within a matter of days. My edit summary was possibly a bit brusque, but it gave my reasons for reverting. In the vast majority of cases there is no comeback. I do agree we should cultivate new editors, but I disagree that me removing a link to an editor's own website is WP:BITE. JFW | T@lk  07:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Robert Altman photos for Hippie article
Hi Pedant,

I was so excited today to hear back from photographer Robert Altman. He allowed the use of three period photos, with proper attribution, which I just added to the article. I think they are quite good; hope you agree. Moved the more contemporary photos to appropriate locations within the article. So, please let me know what you think!Founders4 00:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Long-Overdue RfA Thanks from Alphachimp

 * Very, very nice photo on your userpage. alpha Chimp  laudare 01:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Steve Irwin
If you would like to pay tribute to Steve Irwin, who tragically died on September 4th 2006, just feel free to sign your name on Mil Falcon's userpage under tributes.

Hyperthyroidism
There are several forms of hyperthyroidism, and their management is different. Graves' disease is usually managed with antithyroid drugs (methimazole in the USA, carbimazole in Europe, PTU everywhere) and a little dose of a noncardioselective beta blocker (usually good ole propranolol) if the symptoms are severe. Plummer's disease (toxic nodular goitre) is also treated with those. But hyperthyroidism due to a toxic nodule (adenoma) may require surgery, and a malignant one all the more so. RAI (I-131) is used in all scenarios, but in the diffuse goitres only if medical treatment fails. Which form of hyperthyroidism are you referring to? JFW | T@lk  20:32, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Mercury exposure? Good grief. Are you sure it's not the mercury that is accountable for the side-effects you ascribe to the methimazole? As I said, there is always PTU if methimazole/carbimazole are ineffective, but it's a bitter pill to swallow :-(. I'm unfamiliar with the carnitine; who suggested it? JFW | T@lk  06:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. The authors call that "iatrogenic" because they first gave people thyroxine, then waited for L-carnitine to reverse its action. It doesn't mention mercury. The only papers citing that study are other investigations by the same group in Italy. It doesn't seem to have caused much of stir amongst other researchers. They may have mistaken it for orthomolecular stuff. But I'm glad to hear you're feeling better - that's the main thing. JFW | T@lk  20:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Belleriviere
Thanks so much for your help. I am still on the learning curve here. I appreciate your advice. Thanks again.Belleriviere 19:38, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

thanks
that's a useful tool. Dr U 06:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I hadn't seen that before. AuburnPilot 16:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Very Handy. Might stick it on the desk. Where did you find? \/\/slack  (talk) 21:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CategoryTree_extension

Re: We're working on the same case. (references included)
Hello. Normally I like to duplicate conversations on both our talk pages, just to make sure discussions are unified, but given the length I'll only post to my page, if that's ok, or we could start a subpage somewhere to keep everything together. My talk page can get a little cluttered sometimes!

For reference the discussion is here. --bainer (talk) 15:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Hwacha advocate
Hi Pedant, i am happyapple, i have left a note on your email address just now, i hope you may look at it (water@.....), cheers,--HappyApple 05:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, a barnstar
I just coincidentally am logged in at the moment--I hardly come to this neighborhood any more--and what to my surprise, a barnstar appears even as I'm browsing around! The toys category wasn't anything particularly creative on my part--I believe that I simply broke up a really long, messy list of toys and toy groups and created categories out of the phrasing that was already there. Or maybe I was having a really creative day. :-) Anyway, thanks.  Elf | Talk 21:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Image
I commented above that I like an image...I meant the one where you are holding the bug in your hand. I really like it :). Regards, alpha Chimp (talk) 02:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Sanhedrin ceremony.jpg
I see that someone else helped me out by tagging the pictures as But just out of curiosity, I received an email from the originator (Arutz7 News Service) saying that they released the two pictures into the public domain. How do I document that? Do I cut and paste the whole email, or just the bare info and perhaps a contact address?

Thanks for your help --Historian2 16:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Since the image is now public domain, you only really need to tag it as such. No explanation is necessary. I went ahead and tagged it for you. Laur  ə  n whisper 19:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

NASA Facts
Hey what ever happened to the NASA Facts content I mailed you... I cant seem to find any of it on Wikisource anymore? ALKIVAR &trade; 04:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

DYK
Many thanks for the article -- Samir धर्म 17:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Keane
Regards, Pedant. Well, we entered into revert war. I'm not particularly keen on with that, you know. Sometimes, I can be harsh, but yet again, I think that I can find ways to comprimise with people. Nevertheless, sometimes it's difficult to talk with people, who just don't wanna listen to you. Yet, I regard your intervention with respect, so I hope your words are enough. Just adress User Fluence, please. Go and talk with that guy. If he is willing to talk and have a serious discussion - I'm perfectly open to it. Right now, I just don't find ways to his heart.
 * Regards: Painbearer 09:27, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Working on the Bob Arno page...
Hello Pedant. I've added some references and citations and will work on more mid-October. On August 16, you wrote "moving trivia section so that external links is the last section." But the trivia section is gone completely. I have some refs for that section. Thanks for your guidance. Mercurie 03:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Viriditas edit of "Hippie" article
Hi Pedant. An editor called Viriditas just came in and did a sequential edit (16 by my count) of the "Hippie" article. Really butchered it, in my opinion, especially our carefully worked out lead incorporating the Eisenhower speech and the roots of the anti-war movement.

Very hard to follow and analyze all the stuff that's changed due to the sequential nature of the editing.

Question: Do you know Viriditas? Does he have some special authority?

For now I think I will revert and ask him to cool it. Any thoughts?Founders4 07:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

O.K. Viriditas reverted my revert. Any suggestions? Care to weigh in?Founders4 09:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Quick note
Hi Pedant,

Tried to e-mail you...bounced back with message your mailbox is full.

Thanks for your comments to Viriditas re: "Hippie." Noticed you edited the Eisenhower stuff; does this mean you accept the new location? The old lead worked for me, though of course always open to improvement.

Pretty upset about the Viriditas damage. Wonder if it's worth my while to work on the article at all, with people crashing in and all. BTW, wasn't Ike 1952-60, two terms? Founders4 19:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

More on Bob Arno
Thanks, Pedant. I'll work to bring this page up to Wiki standards. However, I'll be otherwise-occupied for the next three weeks. Don't think I've deserted the project, though! Mercurie 20:39, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi
Hello Pedant. First of all sorry for my English. Thanks for being such a comprehensive person and taking time to come on and solve this out.

Well, this is a long story that I haven't shared with anyone: Even months before my Internet account was opened, I was already a Keane fan. When it was opened around February 2006, I didn't have any idea about the term "Wikipedia". I remember my first edit was around April 8 to Richard Hughes (musician), (drummer of Keane). It was actually a minor edit. Since then, I also started editing the Keane main article, adding lines and history. I mean, the main paragraph was only a stubby line, and the history section was a complete stub. Releases were listed like a trivia section or something like that. Soon, the article started to look better thanks mainly to my effort (I have to say some others also deserve credits, like the user who created the discography box). Gradually, the article became longer and longer, but I don't know why, no one had ever repaired on the grammar. Even when I posted the article for FA, every kind of protests were shown, but no one critizising neither the grammar nor the style.

Also, on Keane singles, Is It Any Wonder was the only one already created. I wrote every other article about the singles and some other users like Badlydrawnjeff helped me to see my mistakes when I thought I was right. Yes, at the beginning, I got very mad with Badlydrawnjeff and showed myself as a stupid person don't understanding the points he was giving me. Now, I thank him for letting me know that. However, the case with Painbearer was not the same. He appeared from nothing and deleted a bunch of lines and corrected the remaining, which was even shorter than the article is today. He also commented he removed the image showing the Keane poster since he thought was very ugly. I considered that as an offense and reverted the article back in form. However, Painbearer reverted this to the version he wanted. I may accept there were some wrong spelled or written lines but not all the article.

After a long dealing with this guy and later some other whose name I can't remember (something with S, but he showed as a more comprehensive person), the article became unstable. Then, I asked for help to the forum to see if someone could help me reverting as he kept doing that.

Things got worse.

When I thought I had FlyingNelly on my side after seeing her edits to convert the article into a good-looking article, well written and accurate. I thought everything had finished. But before, Richyard had already appeared. Somehow, they and Painbearer discusseda and agreed deleting all the contro section of the article and the list of equipment from the article. I moved all the information to other new articles (which now are deleted) to protect the information to be lost. With "help" from anonymous users, Richyard, and the user-vandal The Mekon the articles were deleted. I'm working currently on the article to "satisfie" the others but I'm not sure I'm gonna make it. It doesn't seem to bad for me. See comment by The Bread at the talk page. Hope we all can agree something because your point seems very real for me since I do not own the article but they ain't either so the best thing we can do is to work together, something I still see very difficult --Fluence 22:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Most people interested in telepathy do NOT know or understand the principles of the scientific method and why they are important.
OK, since you assert that there are references to support it, I'll go ahead and ask:

What reference supports the statement: "Most people interested in telepathy do NOT know or understand the principles of the scientific method and why they are important."

Thanks very much. I'm not actually 'sniping at skeptics', I just think that statement is unfounded and would appreciate a reference for it. If there's a supporting reference it could be a useful statement to add to an article. Thank you. User:Pedant 20:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Your sniping
Pedant, you were sniping. Had you actually been interested in getting a supporting reference "to add to an article," you would have simply asked for it instead of making sarcastic remarks. If you were more up front and contrite about your sarcasm, I'd take your request seriously. But not today, thank you. I'm not interested in playing this game with you. Askolnick 03:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll simply assume that you don't have any shred of evidence for that, which I expected, you're taking pot shots at people about verifiability with completely unverifiable wild assertions. Just how would anyone begin to figure what half the people interested in telepathy know or understand? Get serious. I called you on your bs and you're embarassed. Get over it and move on, try something strong next time you want to bash on someone instead of something weak and lame like the above. Don't be embarassed that you are one of the people interested in telepathy who do know about the scientific method. Find 2 more who don't and you've only begun to prove you are right. User:Pedant 04:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Pedant, kindly keep your personal attacks off of my user page. Askolnick 04:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

That's the personal attack right there, the "I called you on your bs and you're embarassed." part I think. Does anyone else think it's 'sniping' to ask for a reference for "Most people interested in telepathy do NOT know or understand the principles of the scientific method and why they are important."? Anyone?User:Pedant 05:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Probably a good approach
Hi Pedant. Your "roof" metaphor is apt, and perhaps you are right that just letting Viriditas crash through the place will eventually lead to a better article. We did manage to put together something good; that's what upsets me, though, because much of what we accomplished has been splintered. Viriditas' demands for references seem particularly arbitrary to me. For example does one really need to reference that peace, love and human fellowship were cherished hippie ideals? I don't doubt his sincerity, but I do think his approach is, as I have said, "precipitous."

Okay, so let's give it a week. Question: at the end of the week, if we want to simply put Ike back in the lead (perhaps with another reference or two) is that considered good form? And how about putting back in the other stuff--cherished hippie ideals and leaders/manifestos? Could use some help finding appropriate references.Founders4 06:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

E-mail, car registration
Hi Pedant,

Tried to e-mail you; got bounced with a note saying your mailbox is full. Re: car registration you might find a DMV employee who sympathizes with you. I found such a person with respect to an old car that had registration problems, and she waived all the back fees in the interest of getting the car back on the road. If there are no tickets for operation without registration, you might find some luck! For this to work, the car has to have been stored on private property (never parked on the street) for all this time, so be sure to say the right thing.

As you probably already know, quite some time ago the DMV made annual filing mandatory to receive a "Certificate of Non-operation." With a minimum fee, no less. If the previous owner could reasonably have been assumed to have been ignorant of this change--due to age, isolation or other factors--you might have a better shot. The more clueless you look, and the more marginal in terms of mainstream acculturation, the better.

If you don't succeed the first time, I would try multiple times at different offices. One hint--my experience is that DMV employees with East Indian backgrounds seem to be to be the worst sticklers when it comes to rules. On the other hand the black ladies at DMV (Americans not Africans) seem more culturally inclined to bend the rules for the sake of human need.Founders4 17:30, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Internet slang
Your recent edit to Internet slang (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot4 02:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Wait, what? User:Pedant 03:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Damn, I've been reverted by Tawkerbot when reverting an anon's inappropriate excision of expletives, and I've been reverted by AntiVandalBot for the same, but I've never been hit by each back-to-back!  There ought to be a barnstar or something for that... :) Joe 05:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's a robot wheel war! User:Pedant 06:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Chuck Marean
I noticed your response in 's AMA request. He's added some accusations, and I'm wondering if it is appropriate for me to reply on that page. Also, there is a long history with Chuck and his editing, and unfortunately his talk page archives are a little mangled. I'm happy to share more background if you wish, either here or via e-mail. Thanks for helping out. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Complete butchering of the "Hippie" lead
Well, not only has Viriditas gotten rid of all mention of principled hippie opposition to the Vietnam War and the cherished hippie ideals of peace, love, compassion and human fellowship--now he has moved the photo of the anti-Vietnam War demonstration completely out of the lead and proposes moving the "How Do! Fellowship in Golden Gate Park" photo also. This leaves just "Dancing Hippies." I guess Viriditas thinks that's all hippies were--joyful fools.

Really, this guy is too much. He asks my opinion about inconsequential matters (whether Neo-hippies needs splitting, for example), yet completely ignores outraged objections to the continued butchering. Think I'll just print up an old edit and call it quits. By the time he's done the article will be "dry as toast," just like the Britannica article.

I thought we were finally going to have an article that got hippies right. Founders4 09:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

A favour
I would be eternally grateful if you would take over the Hmains date delinking case, because I think that to make progress we need to negotiate a compromise, and I think that her comments on Talk:Psephos demonstrate pretty clearly that she is not prepared to negotiate with me in good faith. Thanks, David Mestel(Talk) 17:33, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be so slow. You need to advocate for Hmains, who is an avid date delinker and uses a monotool to remove date links, with Rebecca, who is rolling back his delinkings.  The discussions on WP:MOS have so far been inconclusive on the issue of date delinking.  David Mestel(Talk) 12:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Viriditas making himself at home where he isn't welcome any longer
Hi. I've left you a comment regarding your last edit. You can find it here. Thanks. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 03:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Do what you want, I'm going to take the customary one week off from the dispute. Your unwillingness to discuss your edits suggests to me that any discussion with you would be fruitless. Have fun flailing around by yourself, I'm tired of looking at it. User:Pedant 05:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I apologize in advance for any bad feelings you may have towards me. For the record, I'm not perfect, so I must have done something to elicit this reaction from you.  Well, I just want to let you know that I'm willing to discuss any edits, and I would welcome your continued participation.  &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 08:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Amazing, Viriditas! You pretend such innocence.  Your actions, however, betray you.Founders4 21:21, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Founders, could you have a look at WP:STALK? Thanks. &mdash;Viriditas | Talk 01:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If you wish to accuse me of stalking, after you have spent the better part of the day of wrongly accusing me of falsifying citations, please do so on my own talk page. I haven't been following you around; Mombas and Pedant are co-editors of an article that is close to my heart.  The only reason I haven't bowed out of these most unpleasant communications (as Mombas and Pedant have understandably chosen to do) is that I would like to limit the damage you are doing to the "Hippie" article.  But don't worry, I will leave soon and you will have the article all to yourself. Founders4 03:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

For the record Founders4 is completely welcome here on my discussion page. Viriditas, could you have a look at WP:Don't be a dick and then pretend you didn't know that you were being one?

What you did is you made multiple substantial edits to a stable, good, article, and refused to discuss the changes, acted like you are in charge, completely ignored and disregarded all attempts at discussion, created an RfC with the intent of charging the editors with whom you refused discussion with trying to own the article, and on top of all that you edited the policy you were accusing us of violating.

Your actions have made it impossible for me to assume good faith on your part. Stay off my talk page, wait for the comments you requested and if you have anything further to say to me, don't start off with "I apologize in advance" for what you have already done, feigning ignorance of your actions.

What you need to do to get any further dialogue with me is apologize for what you have already done; stop abusing wikipedian processes; and understand that wikipedia works by consensus, that everyone here is equal, having volunteered their valuable time just the same as you; stop making mass changes without consensus, and without discussion, and stop being a pest on my talk page.

To make it clear, behaving as you have been, you are not welcome on my talk page. Oh, yeah, one more thing, I d'otn crea hwo meny mispullings I meka, stop editing my comments on my talk page. User:Pedant 02:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks Pedant. When this unfortunate episode is over, I look forward to working with you.  I value your friendship and your editing skill.Founders4 03:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Joining you
Hi Pedant. Just wanted to let you know that I have now withdrawn from the "Hippie" project. We had an interesting assessment from the RFC request that V. initiated (let's never mention his name again). He completely ignored it, of course, so I have concluded that your troll assessment is completely correct. So I posted my goodbye notice under "Don't Feed the Troll." Good meeting you and getting to know you in any case."

P.S. The RFC guy just posted an interesting note on my talk page under "Hippie." I don't plan to do anything, just need to withdraw.Founders4 18:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

You go, Pedant. Really don't have the heart for it at present. I'll be watching though. Just read the lead as presently configured--a short lead could be good, but this one sucks! In fact the whole article reads like the life is being sucked out of it. Evil tends to do that... Founders4 08:16, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

tragedy

 * Yes, I agree. In the beginning you voiced an opinion that V wasn't evil.  I hold with M. Scott Peck's work in People of the Lie--he says that if a person intentionally distorts truth, especially for personal gain or advantage, that person is evil.  I believe V has done this in the GeorgeLouis example, and he also did it on Saturday when he accused me of fraud.


 * I'm afraid it is hopeless, Pedant. With regard to the above, I asked an administrator to review the matter, and he is backing V--because he's a "highly respected editor."


 * Eventually there may be a time when the article can be brought back to life, but if Wikipedia chooses to favor technical ability over integrity, if it refuses to screen out evil, decent people will not be willing to participate. That includes me. Founders4 08:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid that as long as Viriditas and I both edit the article, it could never be a good article. At this point he's only editing to annoy the rest of us that have worked so hard on the article.

Maybe when he removes everything that has no citation, and then someone else removes everything Viriditas has added without references the article will be plain vanilla enough to add back what it needs to be good, but with pedantically thorough references. However, I won't be the one, I won't fight with Viriditas, I don't have the infinite time an infinite squabble would take.

If anyone has chased people off the article, it wasn't you, it's Viriditas. (I can't call him V, as I admire the character of V too much.)

You're right, I used to think that anyone could edit, and that the damage could always be fixed... so V wasn't evil, and I formerly did assume good faith on his part. No longer.

I don't see how he could be a highly respected editor, and I'm not willing to look over his edits or his user page or anything else, it would likely set me off.

I may be a hippie, but if we were in the same room and having the discussion we've been having, I'd probably be entirely unable to restrain myself from physical violence.

I'm not going to have any exchange with Viriditas from now on without at least one third party between us. I've officially withdrawn from the article Hippie and any other article where I have to see his smarmy Eddie Haskell pretense at innocence. In my opinion he's an 'absolute dillhole' as my nephew might say. I don't see how he can read his computer screen with his head 3 sphincters deep in his digestive tract. User:Pedant 09:24, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I also tend towards hostility when I engage with Viriditas (out of deference to you, I'll use the name), which is why I can't afford to participate further. One has to pick one's battles--there are times when evil MUST be confronted whatever the cost, but I don't think this is one of them.


 * Today's lead paragraph (it has changed nearly every day since September 18) is the worst yet. And ALL mention of the primacy of hippie political identity (even the demonstration photo) has been moved off the page--quite incredible really!


 * It has been interesting to immerse myself in the "hippie" topic, especially to realize how formative those years were for me.  The values that we lived during that era established an ethical baseline that continues to inform, and what was good far outweighed what was wrong.  I do wonder why Viriditas chose to concentrate on this article--he is the antithesis of everything that hippies stood for.


 * So sorry it turned out this way. Founders4 09:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)