I am dedicated to treating the unpleasant realities with constructive comments and criticizing poorly-formed arguments based solely upon ideology or personal feelings. The scientific method is not an ideology as such. It is the formalization of natural human abilities, developed through evolution, for environmental problem solving.
I will try not to engage in edit wars. Don't revert relevant facts: if you are not a sysops I will make a feeble attempt to stop you. If no sysops subsequently intervenes, I will stop you. If you are a sysops I will relent for the sake of comity after a polite IMO. If you are a moderator, I will give a very polite IMO then shut the hell up.. Unless you are violating standards, in which case, see you in court.
| ||As a confirmed mustard jar for taking on this job as a Sysop on RationalWiki: I, Ariel31459, pledge to only block users if they ask for it, or insert unfunny vandalism.|
I furthermore pledge that if I indulge in secret private conversations about you, we will make a formal report to the mob. Is that all?
If you impugn my motives without warrant, or challenge my "AUTHORITY", er, there is nothing I can or will do.
Some people are suspicious about the opinions of strangers. If we don't know each other let me introduce myself: I am a Steven Pinker fanboy. I am willing to bet I would not label as false an unattributed quote of his opinions. My opinions? People should write about subjects for which they have a certain amount of sympathy, and even some admiration. Don't write about people you hate. You can pretend that you have read all of their books, but I probably won't believe you. Unfunny, negative enthusiasm is typical of hack journalism. Exceptions: people whose admirers can't be trusted, e.g., D.J. Trump, Alex Jones and Stefan Molyneux.