Sarah Jeong racism allegations

General discussion about Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects
Renée Bagslint
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Renée Bagslint » Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:07 pm

Proabivouac wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 5:28 pm
[...]
How was that not a lie?
Probably because that isn't what I said, and you know it. Again.

Any progress on providing evidence for your assertions regarding the BBC which started this little discussion? No? Thought not.

Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Proabivouac » Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:14 pm

Renée Bagslint wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:50 am
Proabivouac wrote:
Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:11 am
Sounds like an Englishman swallowed too much WP:RS and cherished what aftertaste suited his preexisting prejudices.
I'm correcting your mistaken notion of the facts about how things work here in the UK. Another mistaken notion you might like to correct is that it's a good idea to refer to people who sign their posts Renée as "Englishman".

Renée Bagslint
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Renée Bagslint » Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:24 pm

I also don't think it's a good idea to refer to people with names like Timothy, say, as a Frenchwoman. But that does not mean I'm claiming to be called Timothy. It is a courtesy to refer to people who sign their posts with a grammatically feminine name by a gendered noun of the same or a neutral gender. "Courtesy", in case you're interested in ancient history, is what people had before the internet. I made it clear that I was not claiming that Renée is anything other than the name I use to sign my posts. Perhaps you didn't believe that bit either.

Any progress on providing evidence for your assertions regarding the BBC which started this little discussion? No? There isn't any, is there?

Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Proabivouac » Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:36 pm

Renée Bagslint wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:24 pm
"Courtesy", in case you're interested in ancient history, is what people had before the internet.
And it was a whole lot more difficult for people to pretend that they were someone they weren't, and the specific rule that you invoke here was made up only a few years ago. Are you saying that others must play along with it even if we know for a fact that it's untrue? Perhaps you should now demand to be addressed as "Dr. Bagslint" in light of your distinguished academic career, which courtesy requires us to accept as you state it. What field was this again, Dr. Bagslint?

Renée Bagslint
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Renée Bagslint » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:35 am

Proabivouac wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 10:36 pm
Renée Bagslint wrote:
Sat Aug 11, 2018 6:24 pm
"Courtesy", in case you're interested in ancient history, is what people had before the internet.
And it was a whole lot more difficult for people to pretend that they were someone they weren't, and the specific rule that you invoke here was made up only a few years ago. Are you saying that others must play along with it even if we know for a fact that it's untrue? Perhaps you should now demand to be addressed as "Dr. Bagslint" in light of your distinguished academic career, which courtesy requires us to accept as you state it. What field was this again, Dr. Bagslint?
You "know" nothing of the kind, and there is no "it" that is untrue here, except possibly in your overheated imagination. The assertions you have made about me personally are woefully incorrect, as indeed they are bound to be given your complete state of ignorance on that subject. But since you are so down on people using names on the internet that are admittedly not their own, obviously you cannot be doing that: is "Proabivouac" your personal or your family name?

Let us now return to the statements you made about the BBC, the topic that started this discussion which you are working so hard to derail, and for which you have been avoiding providing the requested evidence in a way that is becoming almost painfully obvious. Did those also come from your own overheated imagination, or were you repeating someone else's lies?

Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Proabivouac » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:48 am

Renée Bagslint wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:35 am
is "Proabivouac" your personal or your family name?
You know full well what my name is. Maybe start writing sincerely and see how that works out? Really, it's not that hard. If you're going to throw out a constant stream of vexatious arguments, such as this "Renée" crap, don't be surprised when others get annoyed.

Now what is your field of expertise Herr Doktor Bagslint? I'm just looking for a general idea, not something so specific that it would identify you. I can name some fields that it's definitely not, history for one, anthropology another…please don't try English phonology since I can easily bust you on something like that…but that leaves open many possibilities, including esteemed Doctor of Essjay Emulation Studies.

Renée Bagslint
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Renée Bagslint » Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:54 am

The conclusion which any reader will come to about your statements about journalistic misconduct by the BBC must surely be: those statements were untrue and you knew they were untrue when you made them. In short, you were lying.

Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Proabivouac » Sun Aug 12, 2018 7:10 am

Renée Bagslint wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:54 am
The conclusion which any reader will come to about your statements about journalistic misconduct by the BBC must surely be: those statements were untrue and you knew they were untrue when you made them. In short, you were lying.
In all honesty I can no longer follow what the fuck you are talking about. We agreed from the get-go that BBC strips attribution from journalist authors and you stated that this was the norm in the UK press and there is nothing wrong with this. Now you are saying that my accusation of misconduct – and while I didn't use that term I will agree that it's a form of misconduct – is actually untrue?

What is your field of academic expertise, Herr Doktor Bagslint, excuse me Frau Doktor Bagslint, about which you wrote all these papers and served as a trustee for all these learned societies? You spend your life doing this stuff and now don't want to talk about it? Naw, bullshit. Real academic scholars LOVE to talk about their work.

Renée Bagslint
Posts: 290
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:43 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Renée Bagslint » Sun Aug 12, 2018 8:46 am

Proabivouac wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 7:10 am
Renée Bagslint wrote:
Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:54 am
The conclusion which any reader will come to about your statements about journalistic misconduct by the BBC must surely be: those statements were untrue and you knew they were untrue when you made them. In short, you were lying.
In all honesty I can no longer follow what the fuck you are talking about. We agreed from the get-go that BBC strips attribution from journalist authors and you stated that this was the norm in the UK press and there is nothing wrong with this. Now you are saying that my accusation of misconduct – and while I didn't use that term I will agree that it's a form of misconduct – is actually untrue?
You made three assertions in a post dated Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:41 pm
You wrote:It's funny how BBC is considered to be a "gold standard" source, even though they fail the most basic test of attributing their articles to an author. Some of them are picked up from wires, and they don't indicate that either. I've noticed other shenanigans there, such as accompanying articles about places with photogaphs of different places and the like.
We have dealt with the first one ad nauseam. The other two "shenanigans" you have conspicuously failed to give examples of. On Fri Aug 10, 2018 8:11 am you adressed one on them by saying "Last I checked – several years ago – it was standard practice for all wire stories picked up by BBC to omit credits to anyone besides "BBC." thereby softening it slightly by putting it into the past rather than the present, but again with no evidence. The third, about misleading photographs, you have failed to address at all, in spite of numerous and repeated challenges to do so. To repeatedly ignore challenges for evidence and then, when ignoring those challenges finally becomes unsustainablem to pretend puzzlement about what it is you're being challenged over leads inescapably to the conclusion that you understood the challenges for evidence all along; that you were deliberately evading those challenges; that you were deliberately attempting to divert attention from your attempts to evade them; that you have no such evidence -- you had none at the time and that you have none now. That is not "all honesty", it is all dishonesty.

Proabivouac
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:01 pm

Re: Sarah Jeong racism allegations

Post by Proabivouac » Sun Aug 12, 2018 3:32 pm

So, bearing in mind that I am not attorney litigating against BBC, you expect me to produce a research paper with at least five examples of miscaptioned photographs to support a single post which summarized my anecdotal experiences reading BBC news over the years, and if I do not produce this for you I am a "liar." I did search my gmail for a conversation I had about this with a colleague but after some half an hour have not yet been successful in finding it, maybe it predated my gmail account – it was about a small California town which had been picked up from a wire and illustrated with a stock photograph of a different California location, which I recognized since I am from California and had been there. Beyond this, I am not prepared to embark upon the full scale research project and indictment that you demand, not the least because no one is paying me to do so, and even I did this would be no guarantee that you would shut up. As the WMF correctly discerned, your goal is to cost people money by wasting their time.

Meanwhile, a very simple question that you could answer with no new research at all you continue to evade: You claimed to be a retired academic scholar who had published dozens of papers and served as a trustee for various scholarly journals, later amended to learned societies which publish said journals. Far from asking you to substantiate this claim, I asked only what your field was. You responded in classic Essjay style, stating that you won't answer because it might help others track you down and kill you. You still have not answered, most likely because, as with this "Renée" crap, it's just part of your latest online persona.

You began dogging me across threads when I posted in the social justice warrior thread that socioeconomic justice is completely different from the sexuality and gender issues which drive liberal activists. I believe that your real motivations are to be found in the latter. Certainly that's the post which lit your flame. You said to yourself, "he is socially conservative, I must troll him!" So you picked an arbitrary fight over a single comment about BBC, the central claim of which isn't even in dispute. And you made up shit about your background in the service of this arbitrary argument. That is the simplest explanation.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest