User talk:WarriorScribe/Archive2

First Archive

Okay, the first talk page for me was getting a bit long and unwieldy, so I decided to move it to an archive of sorts:

First Archive (2005): User talk:WarriorScribe Archive1

Our Favorite "Christian's" Response

This is from my user page.

Note for Jason Gastrich I can be reached via email at Icj_tlc@hotmail.com

I read your message. Stop reposting it in my talk page. Based on your childish behavior and treatment of me, at this time, I have no desire to talk to you via email. --Jason Gastrich 22:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I guess he didn't have a good enough response so he keeps deleting his question and my response from his talk page where he posted his question in the first place. Icj tlc 22:48, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done with him, I will continue to keep an eye on him and make sure that he isn't spreading his POV as the "Word of God" here at WikiPedia, but I'm beginning to lose my cool with him, and I said before that I wasn't going to let him bait me, which he is, so I'm done. No more responses to him. He's an idiot and I don't have the time to keep up with his antics, I have 4 children at home, don't need another one on the Internet. Icj tlc 23:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. The way to defeat Gastrich's intent on Wikipedia is to keep on eye on him and edit his attempts at POV pushing. Check out the Bruce Wilkinson article, for example. Someone else posted a summary of a Dec 19 article from the Wall Street Journal that wasn't too flattering. Gastrich removed it and complained that there was a citation needed--but a citation was provided, even if the original article (and one of my responses) forgot a "1." So I found the article (I had read it...I get the WSJ) online and was able to link to it so that a reader wouldn't need a subscription. Gastrich changed the comments, claimed to "improve" it (he minored in English, you see, so he's much better at it than the rest of us...just ask him!), and spun it so that Wilkinson came out looking better than the original article would indicate. But that's not neutral POV. I can think of a couple of ways that the current paragraph can be written to be "more neutral," so I changed it back just to see if Gastrich can actually bring himself to do it right. So far, no good. The Bilbo and Hovind articles are pretty good evidence that Gastrich can't be nPOV, and I have quite a few others accumulated. We'll see, but as it is, I'm building a case for an RfC. WarriorScribe 23:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick question, I try not to tinker with Wikipedia too much, as I've already stated, and I'm not sure how to look up a particular "editor's" (term used very, very loosely here) contrubutions. How do I do this? Icj tlc 23:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can click on that person's name in a message, and that should take you to their "user page." Once there, to the left, you'll see a column of links, among which should be one that says, "User Contributions." If you click that, you'll be taken to a listing of pages that the person has edited. You can customize your view from there. WarriorScribe 23:42, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"mediation"

Did bonaparte (talk · contribs) try to talk to you or did he just issue summary judgement? He has a habit of "mediating" like this. 20:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You all should give a try to compromise. Bonaparte talk 19:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not clear that he did much of anything other than tell me that we needed to consider Gastrich's position and compromise. So, basically, I made my case as forcefully as I could, including as many facts as I could, and inputing what I think is reasonable perspective. None of the responses that I got dealt with any of the facts or the issues and simply, for all worths and purposes, repeated themselves. We needed to "compromise" with Gastrich, and when he rejected David D's reworded statement, we needed to come up with another.

It seems to me that mediators don't issue judgments, per se, but they are supposed to get both sides to "compromise." As you saw, Gastrich won't compromise. What "mediation" occurred was simply a robotic repetition of the same statements. The mediation style lacked leadership qualities and, consequently, was ineffective, in this situation. WarriorScribe 20:58, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know, on further consideration, maybe you'd better look at this, and the statement:

"I think the 2nd proposal is much better. You can add it. There must be also an opinion on B's controversial statements and Jason just did that. Bonaparte talk 07:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)"

I guess that's at least a presumption at "ruling," isn't it?

And, of course, what was to be added was Gastrich's representation, complete with the profanity. Our position wasn't even being considered, obviously, at that point. WarriorScribe 21:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI All yall genetically altered sinners and unbelievers...just kidding. I am so freaking stressed by this dude. Anywho, a moderator User:Fasten(yippee, another one) is talking to me now about the Hovind page. I think he's gonna seriously look into Gastrich's history. Yeah, I know that can't do anything, but I did recomend that admin and/or moderators keep an eye on the weasel. I figure at this point, any help we can get is good. Keep up the fight. Icj tlc 22:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well have faith that Fasten (talk · contribs) will do a good job. Don't worry, Jason will make a lot of noise and but he won't get anywhere. If you let him wind you up, you've won. + == I'm biting ==

Anyway, Soliciting the opinion of an independent third party who will try to mediate. And by mediation I mean try to talk to both sides, understand their point of view and why they have that view and then try to get them to agree on a reasonable position. Bonaparte (talk · contribs) misses out the first bit that would allow him to understand the issue and just dishes ill-thought out decisions, causing mayhem. Both sides must have faith in the mediator. And I for one do not have faith in notre petit général. He means well, bless him, but he's clueless. — Dunc|☺ 22:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Je parle française aussi. Bonaparte talk 19:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, clueless...that's my impression; but I also have to wonder if there isn't a problem with a language barrier, as well. Regardless, the mediation hasn't worked, mostly because Gastrich was never interested in mediation or compromise, in the first place, and Bonaparte hasn't been effective in providing any sort of leadership. The fact is that the subject doesn't need to be in there, at all, but we were willing to allow more appropriate and polite wording. Gastrich would have none of it, and it's clear that it's all about Christians being, as some of the Marines say, "butt hurt" over the comments. It matters only to Gastrich, so why we're still batting it around is beyond me. WarriorScribe 22:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And the winner of the new "I'm telling your daddy!" category is:

Well, Gastrich once again has proven his maturity level. As I was pulling in from work I got a phone call from my pastor (aka Dad) and he asked me if I had been harrassing a "minister" from Southern Cali over the Internet. With obvious suprise, I responded, "Jason Gastrich?" He said "Yeah, I think that's it." I told him the story and he laughed and than asked me to leave him alone, lest he try to call again and disrupt a service. Anywho, I'm not sinking to his level. Just wanted to keep you all updated on the continued hilarity. Icj tlc 01:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I'll print out this package I've been building and send it to David Jeremiah, Miles McPherson, and Neal Weaver. Fair is fair. WarriorScribe 01:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you might want to pass on to Dad that this "minister" from Southern California is almost certainly self-ordained. For quite some time, he was calling himself "Doctor" due to the "award," under suspicious circumstances, of an "honorary" degree from a diploma mill calling itself, "Shepherd Bible College." Well, to make a long story short, after much criticism (that certainly contributed to Gastrich's retreat from Usenet), Gastrich recently told his devotional readers that SBC had some "integrity issues," and so he was returning the doctorate. The problem is--ready for this?--he also claimed, after being asked many times, that SBC ordained him, too. I wondered aloud, elsewhere, if that has been returned, too, or if whatever "integrity issues" caused him to return the "doctorate" were not also applicable to the "ordination." We'll never get an answer to that, of course, but it's a fair question. Regardless, I'd wonder about the authority of SBC to ordain Gastrich or his authority to ordain himself. Bottom line? My ministerial credentials probably carry more weight than his. WarriorScribe 02:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And check out http://groups.google.com/group/maleboge/browse_frm/thread/302d9d60e184928a?scoring=d& WarriorScribe 02:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm biting

Ok, what two girls? Icj tlc 22:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to bite...the reference is to my daughters. WarriorScribe 22:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well Jason has been going on about our vices, and I for one do have a certain interest in ladies. According our vice article, lust certainly counts. So got any pictures? :) — Dunc|☺ 22:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lust? Hmph! Fresh kid! [grin] Well, okay, that was the factor in the first (I was 18...what the hell did I know?)...but not the second! I actually love Anastasia's mother (and the feeling is mutual), but we could never be married to one-another. And of course I have pictures, but what kind of a father would I be if I posted pictures of my kids on the Internet? Please note, however, that the first one is no longer with us. WarriorScribe 23:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ladies were, are, and will continue to be a vice for me, however, I am hopelessly devoted to my wife. Between the 2 of us we have 4 kids, at 18 in-laws, 12 ex-laws, and at least 5 certifiable outlaws (myself included). Was born a minister's son...not a minister. That took a while. Anywho, glad to see you're a fellow Vet. Did my time...uh, I mean duty, in the USMC. Hoorah! Don't have any degrees, but I did graduate with honors from the School of Hard Knocks. Maybe a couple more courses and I can start calling myself doctor. Peace and love! Icj tlc 23:32, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mediation

This is one of the method for you to reach a consensus. It was suggested to me by other sysops. You should give a try. One week no edit to the page. Bonaparte talk 19:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what's known as a "cooling off period," as it were, but the fact remains that, under the circumstances, it's not only "too little, too late," but it's rather humorous that we finally get around to that, just as you finally got around to posting a comment to Gastrich, suggesting that he should compromise. Sorry, B, but your mediation style simply didn't work in this case. No biggee...these things happen. It didn't work...we're done. Time to move on. WarriorScribe 19:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gastrich edit on the talk page removed

Fair is fair. 02:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

final decision

Please see talk page for final decision from the Cabal Mediator Bonaparte talk 20:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]