[WikiEN-l] Susan Mason

Mon Apr 14 10:15:53 UTC 2003

There seems to be a defacto policy of reverting anything Susan Mason or
Dietary Fiber does without engaging in dialog with them. They have been
given the status of trolls (based on past behavior allegedly as the user
Lir). The problem is that their behavior has gradually improved and you now
see the dark side of what was once a reasonable effort to deal with a
troublesome user. I was particularly unimpressed by the alleged trolling in
the James I article, Dietary Fiber's article seems a bit better than the
other.  And in fact in the idiolatry article (although it is terribly
complicated) they seem to be more on the side of the angels than their
opponent.

I suspect their status as trolls needs to be reconsidered. However they may
be banned at this time. I seem to have lost track of their exact status. Oh
now I remember, they would be if they were not AOL.

Anyway, with such low status, it is considered ok to revert their edits
without considering their content or engaging in dialog with them. Or do I
have it wrong?

Fred

> From: cprompt <cprompt at tmbg.org>
> Reply-To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 01:03:36 -0400
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Susan Mason
> 
> I'd also like to add that I have had no problems with Susan Mason or
> Dietary Fiber on the two articles I was watching, that is, "James I of
> England" and "History of Soviet Union". They were called trolls, they
> were told to "go get a history book", and they were told repeatedly that
> their views are wrong. The facts that I did check were correct, and
> Susan Mason offered to cooperate. When someone said that "regime"
> explains the Soviet Union better than "government", Susan Mason referred
> to a dictionary entry, and I noticed that other online dictionaries both
> say that regime means "the government in power". I told those who had
> complaints against Susan Mason that they could make their case stronger
> by outlining which facts and sentences Susan Mason was using were
> incorrect. Then they could (theoretically) make a compromise, after
> doing some fact-checking. Instead, I was told that Susan Mason is lying
> and only pretends to cooperate, and that I was well-meaning but naive.
> Any posts by Susan Mason were reverted immediately. See archived talk
> page for History of Soviet Union, and my talk page.
> 
> --cprompt
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l