User talk:Hipocrite/05/2011

Thanks

You beat me to it with this. --John (talk) 15:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Outing editors

Your recent edit seems like an attempt to out me [1]. I would appreciate it you feel you the need to attempt to find my real life identity, you at least keep what you find, whether accurate or not, to yourself.LedRush (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Apologies, I was certainly not attempting to out you - I thought you were open about your RL ID. I'd recommend you ask to have the edit you link to oversighted at WP:RFO. Hipocrite (talk) 22:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why you would think I was open about my real life ID: I've told people some personal information, but always in generalities. It is disturbing to me that you went through the trouble to attempt to identify me in real life. Very disturbing, actually. I have no real need to hide my real life ID, but would prefer it to remain hidden here regardless. Wikipedians can be a vindictive, evil lot and I just assume they not know who I am.LedRush (talk) 22:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

That edit has now been suppressed, per request to the Oversight team. Seriously, Hipocrite, you've been around here long enough to know ... :/ - Alison ^❤ 22:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

For the record, I completely dispute that the edit in question was a violation of a single policy, in letter or spirit, but I'm happy for it to be oversighted if it makes LedRush happier. Hipocrite (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you have answers to my questions above (1) why did you think I was open about my RL ID and (2) why you would attempt to find my real life ID?LedRush (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

I decline to answer your questions, as any reasonable answer would tend to disclose your RL ID. Hipocrite (talk) 23:25, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

AN/I

I have filed a report about you here. [2]

Hipocrite, I ask sincerely: please, could you simply stop mentioning older accounts? The discussion really needs to cool down, and such speculations are not helpful. SuperMarioMan 02:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

How exactly am I supposed to stop? Just stop responding? Done. Hipocrite (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

That will help tremendously. Many thanks. SuperMarioMan 02:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The discussion is now closed. Please don't feel that the pointer above is intended to discourage you from editing at the topic - when it comes to discussing content, and the merits of sources, your contributions have been invaluable (recent talk page discussions - perhaps not today's, but other, recent ones - can attest to that). SuperMarioMan 03:46, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh no, I'm done. Consider me harassed off the article. Hipocrite (talk) 03:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm very sorry to hear that, and would urge you to reconsider. Rest assured, however, that whatever your ultimate decision is, it has my respect. Sincerely, SuperMarioMan 03:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that as well, Hipocrite. Honestly, I think you pushed the line some on this though. If you had suspicious/concerns, you probably could have brought it up directly with LedRush on his talk page or via e-mail. Not a good decision, IMO. That article is a really, really odd one. Even the Obama articles were easier than this page - good grief, look at the fruit juice topic! Absolutely INSANE the lengths some editors took to get that in there. Likewise the poll. Multiple non-regular editors have come out against it. I think the article is getting some better attention now from admins who hopefully keep some of the more aggressive editors in check. If we're really lucky, we'll see another round of full protection, followed by some serious admin attention to get people to really work on the article, not just shove a POV. Take a break from the article - laugh at the stuff people post, and go from there. Ravensfire (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Ravensfire has said it best. The final outcome of the WP:ANI discussion notwithstanding, the comment that you made at the talk page was reckless and highly inconsiderate, and others at ANI were almost just as reprehensible. Given that recent talk page discussions about proposed content had been amicable and constructive, as evidenced here, this turn of events is all the more damaging. SuperMarioMan 23:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Anybody else want to pile on? It seems to be the fashion. The Spirit of Neutrality and Truth (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry that it comes across as "piling on", but I feel that it needed to be said. It changes nothing about how appreciative I am of Hipocrite's great skill with sources, and his discerning evaluations of proposed content, which have been of huge value to the talk page - the topic is worse off without that insight. SuperMarioMan 01:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

You may mean well, but yeah, it feels like piling on. After someone says "consider me harassed off the article", they're past the point when "advice" feels like anything but harassment. It makes little difference if it's "constructive" advice or just banging someone on the end - the net effect is pretty much the same. Guettarda (talk) 04:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)