Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/RJII/Proposed decision

Defense by RJII

"7) Although RJII does not give biographical details on his user page, does not discuss his interests there and declines to identify his point of view when asked [5], viewed as a whole his point of view can be characterized as taking the viewpoint that capitalism is an ideal system which has never actually been implemented. This is evident from his first edits [6] to capitalism."

This is a gratiutous attempt to impugn a bias on RJII. Assuming this was written by Bauder, Fred Bauder does not know what is going on inside RJII's head. RJII is a free thinker, and seek nothing but to learn the truth and to be honest. There is no evidence that he have ever claimed that "capitalism an ideal system which has never actually been implemented", neither in Talk or an article Post. Bauder is unjustified in making this claim. In fact, in the "Which Economies are Capitalist?" section, which he was majorly responsible for bringing into being, RJII never makes such a claim, but merely make it known that some people consider some modern economies mixed economy ( or even corporatist) rather than capitalist --an important bit of information. How does Bauder know that RJII is not undecided on these issues? With all due respect, Bauder is out of line here. Regardless, his POV, whatever that may or may not be is irrelevant. This is tantamount to an ad hominem. His questioning to RJII on the statement page whether he has an "Objectivist POV" take the character of a witchhunt or McCarthy interrogation to detect secret Objectivists. This should not even be relevant. I'd like to make a motion for Fred Bauder's recusal from the case on the basis of this show of prejudice. RJII 17:34, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"8) RJII has seldom, if ever, added information to the article capitalism, concentrating his editing on disputing definitions and characterizations which contradict his point of view. He has expressed a relish for conflict [7], [8], [9] and contempt for research [10]."

This is a false statement. See RJII's answers to the question from Fred Bauder on the Statement page. RJII has contributed significantly to the "Which Economies are Capitalist?" section ..more than any other user, and is responsible for the existence of that section. It is true that he enjoys intellectual debate (conflict). Debate can be very productive, and I say necessary to come up with good articles. As far as the claim of RJII being contemptible of research the statement in [1] was obviously said in jest. One need only consult the definitions of capitalism article where he inserts the results of his research from economists, philosophers, as well as dictionaries in order to devise a "typical definition of capitalism." (Note that he has inserted definitions from both pro and anti-capitalists, Such as Friedman [2], and Oppenheimer [3]. Also he researched Noam Chomsky's views and put in a quote from Noam Chomsky in the capitalism article. [4]) RJII 17:16, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"9) RJII has generally only advanced dictionary definitions of capitalism as sources for his contentions. These definitions are sourced. He has characterized one of them as a "Marxist" definition in the talk pages but has not shown any source for this contention in the work of Karl Marx, maintaining there was no necessity to do so, it being common knowledge that Marx characterized capitalism as a system under which private interests control the means of production."

This is true. And it's important to note that this post was to Talk, not to the article. Posts to the article may require being sourced, but not comments made in Talk. RJII 17:41, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)