Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) at 12:42, 31 March 2012 (Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 3d) to User talk:AGK/Archive/73.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:AGK/Notice

Wikipediaforum

Hi AGK, I am somewhat disappointed by you saying on my talk page that you were in favour of blocking editors over the harassment of Fae at his RFC/U, yet you are posting here, cohorting with the very people who were harassing him. Why do you feel it's important to do this? Just wondering, because the impression of that I know isn't a good one. Just curious. Russavia 19:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

• I should say by cohorting I mean associating with them, even if it is to tell Eric Barbour what a tool he is; I know he's a tool, you know he's a tool, gawd, he know's he a tool. But wouldn't it be best to keep out of their house, so to speak? Do you agree that these sites are basically attack sites? Or not? Again, just curious at to your thoughts. Russavia 20:09, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

• • I would hardly say I was associating with Eric Barbour. A comment I posted on your talk page was, you will see, relayed to that website; and in the course of the discussion, that individual said something rather objectionable to which I responded. The venue is more than the sum of its participants, especially only one, and I happen to support its purpose: to be a Misplaced Pages critique site which is less dirty than WR. If you do not agree with the existence of these sites at all, then I suppose that is fundamental difference of opinion - and an understandable one, because many editors object to these sites, just as many editors think they are useful. It's certainly a good point that it might be better to keep away from any site he uses, simply to deny him the attention, but again I think critique sites are (in principle) a good thing. AGK 22:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)