Talk:Should demonstrations against COVID-19 measures have been allowed in 2020?
Add topicLatest comment: 10 months ago by AP295 in topic Comment on the name
Comment on the name
[edit source]As I've mentioned in the wikidebate on firearm owneship, which I did not make but whose title I changed, it's rather 'Orwellian' to speak of what we are "allowed" to do. If anything, the debate title should read "Should demonstrations against COVID-19 have been prohibited in 2020?" or something to that effect. Laws and policy exist to prohibit or constrain, and we must speak of them in this language to keep a proper perspective. I don't say it rhetorically, the allowed/notallowed vocabulary really is reminiscent of Orwell's newspeak. Incidentally, while I've read many of his essays and a few of his other books, I actually haven't read 1984 (it's on my reading list), though I did briefly read the appendix on newspeak to get an idea of what he was trying to say. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 10:28, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I pass comment for today to prevent another fruitless debate. I will see whether I find the energy to respond in the coming days. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 10:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Your lack of energy didn't stop you from issuing a judgement on my concern. Come now. Why are you so sour lately? You come to my talk page and demand I explain myself, then vanish, only to write off my concerns here (which are morally and ethically serious) as "fruitless debate". Should we not talk about content that many people are likely to see? Is this not precisely the venue to discuss such things? Should I have simply changed the title without waiting for a reply, like I did on the other firearms debate? Nobody moved it back, so I assume nobody had any real objections to that. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 10:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- (post dropped) --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree, but if you don't want me on your talk pages, then just say so. Don't make it out like I'm imposing some terrible burden upon you by asking a serious question. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I dropped my comment above as too personal; I can do better and choose a better venue. One can still read it in the revision history. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Very well. However I think it's entirely reasonable for me to make a comment like this. If such comments are not welcome then fine, but let it be said that they're not welcome. That's not what someone would think reading Wikiversity/Wikimedia's policies or mission statements. They would think that critique is welcome, and attribute lack of any such critique to consensus. This is quite a different thing. I've suggested a replacement title and I'm trying to be helpful in general. I'm not merely panning your resource here. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I may explain to you what is wrong with your comment on your user talk page, if you indicate that you want me to; this page does not deserve the ensuing verbiage from both parties, me and you. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- To be clear, you don't need my permission to make a comment on my talk page. I should hope that whatever you do add is thoughtful and fair though. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Do your prefer that I explain the matter on your talk page or that I drop the subject? --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I have no preference and you do not need my permission to comment. Do as you please. I should hope that I am given a consistent and honestly-enforced set of rules to work with, but that's Wikiversity's job. Beyond that say what you will, with the understanding that I shall do the same. Though out of courtesy, I will decline commenting on the talk pages of your resource(s) if you ask me to in no uncertain terms (naturally I may or may not reference anyone's resources in my own material). The same goes for anyone else, though I might make an exception if I see something particularly egregious. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Do your prefer that I explain the matter on your talk page or that I drop the subject? --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:25, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- To be clear, you don't need my permission to make a comment on my talk page. I should hope that whatever you do add is thoughtful and fair though. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I may explain to you what is wrong with your comment on your user talk page, if you indicate that you want me to; this page does not deserve the ensuing verbiage from both parties, me and you. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Very well. However I think it's entirely reasonable for me to make a comment like this. If such comments are not welcome then fine, but let it be said that they're not welcome. That's not what someone would think reading Wikiversity/Wikimedia's policies or mission statements. They would think that critique is welcome, and attribute lack of any such critique to consensus. This is quite a different thing. I've suggested a replacement title and I'm trying to be helpful in general. I'm not merely panning your resource here. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I dropped my comment above as too personal; I can do better and choose a better venue. One can still read it in the revision history. --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree, but if you don't want me on your talk pages, then just say so. Don't make it out like I'm imposing some terrible burden upon you by asking a serious question. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- (post dropped) --Dan Polansky (discuss • contribs) 11:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
- Your lack of energy didn't stop you from issuing a judgement on my concern. Come now. Why are you so sour lately? You come to my talk page and demand I explain myself, then vanish, only to write off my concerns here (which are morally and ethically serious) as "fruitless debate". Should we not talk about content that many people are likely to see? Is this not precisely the venue to discuss such things? Should I have simply changed the title without waiting for a reply, like I did on the other firearms debate? Nobody moved it back, so I assume nobody had any real objections to that. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 10:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)