Archives: no archives yet ( create) |
|
|
I noticed that of your last 500 edits all but twenty were NXIVM related are you a coach or just full time staff Keyser Sözetigho —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyser Sözetigho ( talk • contribs) 20:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
So Itake it you are a member of this organization? Chrisrus ( talk) 20:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Just because I edit a Wikipedia page does not make me a member of any organization.
With that said, how can we work together to resolve the neutrality dispute? I feel that resolving these type of disputes is important for any Wikipedia page. U21980 ( talk) 21:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Discuss away! Chrisrus ( talk) 03:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
What is interesting to you and me both me is improving the articles NXIVM and Keith Raniere. In this context, let "improve" mean in the opinion of the abstract "reader" of whom we must always assume complete ignorance of the referents of articles therefore with no preformed opinion one way or the other. We assume he or she wants just cold facts with no bias one way or the other. Chrisrus ( talk) 03:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
You seem to have semi-agreed to my proposal that we good faith try to find someone else to write the articles instead of us. If that doesn't work out after a good faith effort we can talk about editing it ourselves, I proposed. I have begun looking into the recommended procedures, and I have some authors in mind that I could suggest and was looking forward to finding out who you were going to suggest, but I was hoping for a stronger commitment from you that you will help me try to find someone else to do the actual writing other than you or me and not to write it per se ourselves but instead agree to work with me to see to it that it gets written. We would be sort of co-producers of the article but not authors, we would oversee, only, and contribute mostly to the article's discussion pages sure, but not write the articles. Chrisrus ( talk) 03:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
In the spirit of contribution, I was actually wondering if you could assist me in resolving a minor issue on the Raniere page. In an attempt to improve the page overall, I added in a picture of Raniere that I found online but I can't find any existing copyright information for any picture I find of Raniere (even after searching for quite some time online). Have you had to deal with this kind of issue before? Thanks in advance! U21980 ( talk) 18:51, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi U21980, Thanks for the comments on the Clare Bronfman page. There are still some points there that seem unsubstantiated to me, and not written in a neutral tone, like:
I have changed the POV tag to a POV-Check tag to get another view. Hope that helps. Mr Sheep Measham ( talk) 08:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Can you please provide a wikilink to the sockpuppet case you spoke about and copied onto the page regarding Link? I don't see a block on that user, nor the SP case? Thanks Tiggerjay ( talk) 16:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in the matter of patents held by KR. Like many obsessive Wikipedians I am a curious person who wants to know things and is disappointed when some rule keeps information I'm interested in from being included, so I hope we can find a way to include it.
One thing I'm curious about is KR and NXM, mostly because I live in the area and like a lot of people get the paper and read it. With that background it's not surprising that I think he's a villain and want to check up on him using things like Google, Wikipedia, and so on.
Anyway, I wanted to know about his patents because he claims to hold patents and I was skeptical and wanted to check on whether that was true or not and what they were. I did this some time ago and wrote a brief report about it on the discussion page of KR's article. I used Google Scholar, which has a patent exclusion on/off choice. When I turned the patents off, I got basically nothing, just legal papers and whatever else I wrote there.
But when I put the patents back in, I got many more hits. Most of those hits, however, appeared to me to be the same "intelligent switching" thing over and over and over. I don't know what that means or the difference between them all, nor could I tell if they were patents for real or just patents he'd applied for, or if there was no difference between them all, maybe he was just re-patenting the same thing over and over and over for some strange reason, or what the heck was up with that.
About the inelligent switching thing, I'd like to know if it is used by anyone. If no one uses it, wouldn't that be a failed invention? I mean, it's all well and good to patent something, but Edison isn't famous for his patents so much as the importance of his inventions. The phone changed the world, but if someone has fifty-somesuch patents for an internet switching system he's an inventor of no significance if it never gets used.
There was also a sort of extendable roof thing for atheletic tracks; I thought that was wierd. It soundeed cool, but again, has anyone ever used it? I get this picture in my mind of KR running track and getting the sun in his eye or somesuch and dashing off some fantasy of a thing to the patent office, filling out the forms and and payig his fees or whatever it is that you have to do to get a patent on a thing, which I imagine just has to be clearly novel, not necessarily economically viable, feasable, work properly, work at all, or otherwise be a good invention. Like I could go jogging and imagine a diamond running surface, but if it's a terrible idea am I an inventor of any importance? I'd like to see a picture, too, because that really would help a person understand what it even is.
Speaking of not even knowing what the heck somehting even is, what about that casino thing with the house and the players doing some kind of a game, what is that? A new form of gambling? Have you seen the picture of him reading "How to Win at Gambling"? Just Google Images his name and fish around a bit. Man, did that image leap to mind when I saw that patent. Weird. Oh, and have you heard about the superior daytrading system that lost, how much money? Do you think he might have a gambling problem?
Please feel free to give me your thoughts on what that patent is. It may be a new category of thing that Wikipedia should have an article about. There should be no notable referent which doesn't have an article on Wikipedia. " Entrance-exchange structure"? Is that even an English term? C'mon, feel free to speculate, what do you think it is?
And finally, I found that he had patents on each of the NXIVM sashes. Makes sense that the business should copyright on those, but it's hardly proof of his claim to be an inventor. Why did it show up in the google scholar patent search, you can patent a sash? I'd've thought that a sash would be the kind of thing one would copyright, not patent. But then again, I've never seen a sash quite like those.
I didn't find the patent for Rational Inquiry but I'd like to.
So anyway, I'm dying to hear whatever you have to say about the topic of his patents. Chrisrus ( talk) 05:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I am reporting you and I hope you get your posting privileges revoked. This encyclopedia does not need to be infected with the propaganda of creepy cult members. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.77.90 ( talk) 20:16, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Archives: no archives yet ( create) |
|
|
I noticed that of your last 500 edits all but twenty were NXIVM related are you a coach or just full time staff Keyser Sözetigho —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyser Sözetigho ( talk • contribs) 20:29, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
So Itake it you are a member of this organization? Chrisrus ( talk) 20:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Just because I edit a Wikipedia page does not make me a member of any organization.
With that said, how can we work together to resolve the neutrality dispute? I feel that resolving these type of disputes is important for any Wikipedia page. U21980 ( talk) 21:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Discuss away! Chrisrus ( talk) 03:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
What is interesting to you and me both me is improving the articles NXIVM and Keith Raniere. In this context, let "improve" mean in the opinion of the abstract "reader" of whom we must always assume complete ignorance of the referents of articles therefore with no preformed opinion one way or the other. We assume he or she wants just cold facts with no bias one way or the other. Chrisrus ( talk) 03:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
You seem to have semi-agreed to my proposal that we good faith try to find someone else to write the articles instead of us. If that doesn't work out after a good faith effort we can talk about editing it ourselves, I proposed. I have begun looking into the recommended procedures, and I have some authors in mind that I could suggest and was looking forward to finding out who you were going to suggest, but I was hoping for a stronger commitment from you that you will help me try to find someone else to do the actual writing other than you or me and not to write it per se ourselves but instead agree to work with me to see to it that it gets written. We would be sort of co-producers of the article but not authors, we would oversee, only, and contribute mostly to the article's discussion pages sure, but not write the articles. Chrisrus ( talk) 03:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
In the spirit of contribution, I was actually wondering if you could assist me in resolving a minor issue on the Raniere page. In an attempt to improve the page overall, I added in a picture of Raniere that I found online but I can't find any existing copyright information for any picture I find of Raniere (even after searching for quite some time online). Have you had to deal with this kind of issue before? Thanks in advance! U21980 ( talk) 18:51, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi U21980, Thanks for the comments on the Clare Bronfman page. There are still some points there that seem unsubstantiated to me, and not written in a neutral tone, like:
I have changed the POV tag to a POV-Check tag to get another view. Hope that helps. Mr Sheep Measham ( talk) 08:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Can you please provide a wikilink to the sockpuppet case you spoke about and copied onto the page regarding Link? I don't see a block on that user, nor the SP case? Thanks Tiggerjay ( talk) 16:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in the matter of patents held by KR. Like many obsessive Wikipedians I am a curious person who wants to know things and is disappointed when some rule keeps information I'm interested in from being included, so I hope we can find a way to include it.
One thing I'm curious about is KR and NXM, mostly because I live in the area and like a lot of people get the paper and read it. With that background it's not surprising that I think he's a villain and want to check up on him using things like Google, Wikipedia, and so on.
Anyway, I wanted to know about his patents because he claims to hold patents and I was skeptical and wanted to check on whether that was true or not and what they were. I did this some time ago and wrote a brief report about it on the discussion page of KR's article. I used Google Scholar, which has a patent exclusion on/off choice. When I turned the patents off, I got basically nothing, just legal papers and whatever else I wrote there.
But when I put the patents back in, I got many more hits. Most of those hits, however, appeared to me to be the same "intelligent switching" thing over and over and over. I don't know what that means or the difference between them all, nor could I tell if they were patents for real or just patents he'd applied for, or if there was no difference between them all, maybe he was just re-patenting the same thing over and over and over for some strange reason, or what the heck was up with that.
About the inelligent switching thing, I'd like to know if it is used by anyone. If no one uses it, wouldn't that be a failed invention? I mean, it's all well and good to patent something, but Edison isn't famous for his patents so much as the importance of his inventions. The phone changed the world, but if someone has fifty-somesuch patents for an internet switching system he's an inventor of no significance if it never gets used.
There was also a sort of extendable roof thing for atheletic tracks; I thought that was wierd. It soundeed cool, but again, has anyone ever used it? I get this picture in my mind of KR running track and getting the sun in his eye or somesuch and dashing off some fantasy of a thing to the patent office, filling out the forms and and payig his fees or whatever it is that you have to do to get a patent on a thing, which I imagine just has to be clearly novel, not necessarily economically viable, feasable, work properly, work at all, or otherwise be a good invention. Like I could go jogging and imagine a diamond running surface, but if it's a terrible idea am I an inventor of any importance? I'd like to see a picture, too, because that really would help a person understand what it even is.
Speaking of not even knowing what the heck somehting even is, what about that casino thing with the house and the players doing some kind of a game, what is that? A new form of gambling? Have you seen the picture of him reading "How to Win at Gambling"? Just Google Images his name and fish around a bit. Man, did that image leap to mind when I saw that patent. Weird. Oh, and have you heard about the superior daytrading system that lost, how much money? Do you think he might have a gambling problem?
Please feel free to give me your thoughts on what that patent is. It may be a new category of thing that Wikipedia should have an article about. There should be no notable referent which doesn't have an article on Wikipedia. " Entrance-exchange structure"? Is that even an English term? C'mon, feel free to speculate, what do you think it is?
And finally, I found that he had patents on each of the NXIVM sashes. Makes sense that the business should copyright on those, but it's hardly proof of his claim to be an inventor. Why did it show up in the google scholar patent search, you can patent a sash? I'd've thought that a sash would be the kind of thing one would copyright, not patent. But then again, I've never seen a sash quite like those.
I didn't find the patent for Rational Inquiry but I'd like to.
So anyway, I'm dying to hear whatever you have to say about the topic of his patents. Chrisrus ( talk) 05:50, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
I am reporting you and I hope you get your posting privileges revoked. This encyclopedia does not need to be infected with the propaganda of creepy cult members. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.227.77.90 ( talk) 20:16, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
16:44, 24 November 2015 (UTC)