User:Moulton/Refractory Redactions of Abd Lomax

From Wikiversity

The following talk page comments have been redacted by User:Abd:Abd.

Some ornery cuss protected Motivation and emotion/Textbook/Specific emotions[edit]

I was going to add ornery to the list of specific emotions in JT Neill's Textbook on Motivation and Emotions, but some ornery cuss protected it.

This was the term I was looking for to characterize someone who is riled up with adrenalin when they are aroused or provoked.

For further information, see this list of tribes, clans, and factions.

Moulton 23:56, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

  • The above was redacted by Abd on 18:18, 24 August 2010 with the edit summary, "(→Comment from Moulton [redacted]: please use this page to develop cooperation among all Wikiversity users. Have some tea.)"

    Abd added the following remarks:

Comment from Moulton [redacted][edit]

original comment. Moulton 23:56, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Please use this page to develop cooperation between Wikiversity users, not to complain about them or to organize response, unless this organization and response is a matter of consensus. Please do not embarrass any of my guests or invitees here. Thanks. If you wish to complain or comment, where this might be embarrassing, you may email me.

This is not a comment or rejection of your original comment, Moulton, simply a request that these matters not be brought up in this place, where we may all meet in a spirit of inquiry and seeking understanding and depth. Thanks for understanding. --Abd 18:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Example[edit]

  • Abd, tl;dr. As I've said, I would not be comfortable unprotecting this page. Please make a request at RCA or wherever you feel is appropriate. Adambro 07:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Here you have evidence that Adam is "not comfortable" acting to enable me to make constructive edits to JT Neill's project on Motivation and Emotion. —Moulton 11:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Moulton, I give you credit for great intelligence, please return the attitude. If Adambro is "not comfortable" taking an action, that is his complete right. He has sovereignty over his own actions, as you do over yours. Agreed? He and I and you are responsible for what we personally do. Adambro is, above, pointing me to the next phase of normal dispute resolution process, apparently we disagree on something. This is not a place to resolve that, Wikiversity is the place. This Talk page is a place where we can sit down together to explore our relationships and our goals, but, first, simply to get to know each other better. This is not a purely social interaction, for the goal is mutual understanding that may lead to less conflict on-wiki and other benefits. --Abd 18:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I've read your above comment now and looked at recent changes from overnight and seen the mess that has been created. I remain of the opinion that you are, by reinstating his edits, inadvertently encouraging him. Please try to avoid doing so. He may make a few useful contributions but this is far outweighed by his inappropriate behaviour. Before Diego decided to copy what you'd done with Thekohser and invited Moulton to evade his block and use an alternative account my impression is that he hadn't been very active on the project for a while. You suggest that he may not cooperate with self-reverting or whatever if he thinks he's just going to be blocked anyway but I don't believe that. He showed with Caprice that he wasn't willing to cooperate with the community despite some efforts from myself to facilitate those negotiations by various means. The more time we waste concerning ourselves with him the more I suspect he'll disrupt the project. I do not wish to discuss this any further, I don't want to waste my time writing about Moulton and I don't think the project should be distracted by him either. Nevertheless, as I've said, if you wish for the page concerned here to be unprotected then please find someone else prepared to do it. I'm not. Adambro 09:52, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The first thing I notice is that Adam believes that your encouragement of me is inadvertent. I suppose he means unintentional but in either case, it occurs to me that Adam is unclear on your goals, objectives, aims or intentions. I suggest you add a brief paragraph on your main personal user page where you lay out in concise and clear English your top-level objectives for participation in Wikiversity.

The second thing I notice is that Adam makes reference to inappropriate behavior without ever delineating what he has in mind as inappropriate behavior. As near as I can tell, his concept of inappropriate behavior is synonymous with any participation at all, no matter how beneficial or constructive it might by, and no matter how much that participation is invited or welcomed by other scholars at Wikiversity. Can you help clarify for me precisely what Adam has in mind when he uses the term, "inappropriate behavior"?

The next item in Adam's message to you addresses the difference between his beliefs and yours with respect to the question of cooperation. Note that Adam speaks of cooperation with the community as opposed to cooperation with specific editors. Insofar as the community is not of one mind (nemine contradicente), it's not clear to me that the notion of cooperation with the community is well defined. For example, with respect to the page protection in question, as near as I can tell, Adam is the only person who disfavors unprotecting the page. As near as I can tell, everyone else in the community favors unprotecting it. So on that point, the community is not of one mind; the community fails nemine contradicente by just one vote — namely Adam's veto. It is unclear why his lone dissent suffices to carry the day and becomes the operational governing policy. Is there an unarticulated principle of consensus at Wikiversity that nothing is permitted unless no one objects?

The next item in Adam's response takes up Adam's fears (or suspicions) of future "disruptions of the project." It seems to me that Adam's concept of "disruption" is at variance with yours, mine, or that of just about anyone else. Could you undertake to discover what Adam has in mind when he speaks of his fears of future disruption?

The next item in Adam's remarks introduces the notion that these issues are a "distraction" from some otherwise unspecified direction of motion of the project. Could you undertake to discover what Adam has in mind with respect to the direction of progress of the project, and clarify how my participation is at variance with that direction?

Finally, could you ask JTNeill to unprotect his own project page, and to explain in unambiguous terms why he is unprotecting it?

Thank you for your cooperation in moving the project forward in the directions contemplated by James, Leigh, John, and the other active scholars who are pursuing their educational objectives at the English Wikiversity.

Moulton 11:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

  • The above comments from Moulton were redacted by Abd on 18:33 24 August 2010, with the edit summary, "(→Example: redact and respond.)"

    Abd added the following note:

additional comment from Moulton redacted Moulton 11:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Moulton, in addition to reading your entire comment here, I will read Adambro's comment in situ, but from his response, he does not wish to discuss the particular matter further. That's his right. He remains welcome here, and I will, indeed, invite him to come again. I will explain further below. --Abd 18:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)