I feel I should also mention, I do wish you would break up your posts a bit more. I always copy and paste, and do it myself. . . have pity on your ADD readers.
hey, you should contribute to the wiki, bookworm.
On a similar vein, I would like to be clear; this is not about my restriction. This is about your behavior. In my case it only was asking me for my position in such a way that the request seemed casual and friendly, and then taking that as complete without the clarification it would merit. However, in several other threads you have made it clear that you don't believe people who would describe themselves as anti-abortion are deserving of a basic level of courtesy or respect. This strikes me as a counter-productive, and I would like to understand why you feel it is acceptable. I do appreciate that you have been extremely helpful in a number of things, and I am very sorry to be responding so un-charitably; almost certainly I should have waited and found a better way to bring this up. Certainly you have every right to end this conversation at any point, and if you choose to do so now I will not ask you again.
My concerns for your literacy are entirely literal. More than once you genuinely do not seem to have understood the words which were written for you to read. Anyone will misread every now and then, but when you bring up statistics which look exactly like they address a central argument I'm making--but which do not--and then demonstrate ignorance of that central argument, which was posited in one of the more carefully written and legible posts I've ever made, I feel concerns about your literacy are legitimate.
In light of this, I ask that you don't make snide remarks about my literacy, whatever that's supposed to mean, back off, and stop bothering me.
When I said I "jump on" people, I did not mean I purposefully try to get people restricted the moment they say something which could be construed as anti-choice. I thought that much was obvious - instead, I was acknowledging that sometimes mistakes can be made, especially when we are dealing with such a sensitive topic. These mistakes should not be attributed to me as an individual, because, as noted above, these decisions are taken by the CC - and if you ever get into the CC you will be able to see the level of support for your restriction for yourself and appreciate the concept of a collective decision. The only reason you are chasing after me about this issue is that I asked you directly what your position on abortion was, and I was the only one who bothered to debate with you, to show where you had made an error. I also agreed to send you the article, which would have been unavailable to you unless I gave my help, so you could read about the issue for yourself.
Once more, you fail to answer the question. The question was not about the restrictions policy; it was about the reasoning behind your pattern of behavior. The question was, how is the practice of "jumping on" people who say things that "seem anti-choice" helpful?
a) Thank you. and b) this does not boost my confidence in your literacy, but I appreciate the effort.
As for the purpose of our restriction policy, it's outlined clearly in the FAQ. Discussion of whether the policy should be changed is strictly internal to the CC.
To clarify - I read the entire article before we had this conversation, when I was looking for statistics to support my argument.
