Race and intelligence

You ought to calm down with your comments on this article’s talk page. I suspect that I agree with you in more areas related to this topic than you might realize, but if you keep displaying this kind of hot-headedness it’s just going to make improving the article more difficult for everyone involved. --Captain Occam (talk) 18:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Thanks for your input at mediation. It took courage to say that, and I agree with you. There's currently a poll about whether the article is focused on the data, or padded out with the 'apologia' as you put it, or split into two (?). I would encourage you to vote. mikemikev (talk) 22:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hey Faye, with respect to this edit: I'm trying to keep discussions specific to different sections, otherwise things start to get confusing. could you try to to focus your comments more? for instance, the first paragraph your wrote was fine - it focused on the issue of whether a single editor model would work - but after that it started to move into other points that are better dealt with in other sections. see what I mean? --Ludwigs2 09:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Race and Intelligence

could you do me a favor, please, and tone back some of your statements? phrases like 'which is crypto for...', 'embarrassing handwaving', 'explaining it all away with silly explanations ', 'whites are stupider than Asians...' put people off, and it would help things move along if you were a bit more politic. I'm not suggesting you change what you're saying, mind you; I'm just asking if you can say it in a less 'in your face' kind of way. --Ludwigs2 17:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

race and intelligence mediation

Hey faye,

I've been trying not to interfere with the page too much, partly because you seem to be suspicious of my actions, but I need to ask three things of you:

1. please try to keep your posts short and concise - those long, long posts that try to cover everything are difficult to take in all at once; it's easier if you handle one issue at a time.
2. please refrain from attacking slrubenstein. I do understand that there's some tension there, but berating him is only going to make things worse, and what we are trying to do here is make things better.
3. please try to talk with the other participants. when you make these long posts in separate sections it's impossible to build a discussion. talk with them and try to build something you can all agree on

is that ok? --Ludwigs2 03:44, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

just as an aside, have you ever heard of HAI? I think you might mix well with the group, if they are in your area - good people. --Ludwigs2 18:57, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Bpesta.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Bpesta.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 07:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WQA

I have posted a thread concerning you at WQA. Wapondaponda (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Faye, you are being discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Incivility by User:TechnoFaye. You should have been alerted of this sooner.

Please stop using uncivil language in your discussion of the Race and intelligence mediation. Wikipedia does not allow "racial, ethnic, sexual and religious slurs, and derogatory references to groups such as social classes or nationalities," and if you are unwilling to adhere to this you will be blocked. Rant and rave all you like on MySpace, but we have this policy to avoid having the hostile and poisonous atmosphere so common on the rest of the internet. We're here to collaboratively build an encyclopedia, not to score points off each other or to make derogatory comments about people.

By all means argue that reliable sources say that the average IQ of black populations is lower than other populations (why that is is another matter), but equating this to 'Blacks are stupid' is not going to help us to write an article and is only inflammatory. If you were saying 'People with Down Syndrome are stupid' I'd be giving you exactly the same warning. Fences&Windows 02:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest you look at the context the question was asked in before accusing editors of making derogatory comments. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 02:39, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

archiving your talk page

Faye, if you add the following code to the top of your talk page (before the first section), Mizsabot will automatically archive your old material:

{{User:MiszaBot/config
|algo           = old(31d)
|archive        = User talk:TechnoFaye/Archive %(counter)d
|counter        = 1
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|archiveheader  = {{talkarchivenav}}
|minthreadsleft = 4
}}
{{archives|auto=yes}}

The first template controls the auto-archiving; you can read the details at User:MiszaBot/Archive_HowTo. the second template is a box for accessing the archives once they are set up. just thought this might be useful.

it didn't work. I just deleted all the stuffTechnoFaye Kane 20:58, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

whoa nelly

re: this and similar. I'm trying to work with you Faye, and don't appreciate getting my hand bit for it. Please note that I will be keeping a very close eye on the mediation discussion for a while, so try to practice the things we've talked about in previous exchanges above (keeping your answers short and to the point, avoiding personal attacks on other editors, and etc.). thanks. --Ludwigs2 14:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--> why Faye is disgusted with the race/intelligence mediation

Hi Faye.

I think Mathsci's obviously biased noisemaking won't have much effect. He appears to be arguing that mediation is compromised because the article has been slightly vandalised. I very much doubt this will wash.

If anything it's had the opposite effect of spurring Ludwig into a 'no more Mr. Nice Guy' mode, which will help cut through the nonsense and hasten the inevitable implementation of the factual rather than PC article.

Incidentally, may I take this opportunity to thank you for your invaluable input. Your courageous ultra-straightalking approach is a perfect counterweight to expose the ultra-PC crowd, and allowed the formation of a more middle-ground plan, which I think is the way to go.

Also your style provides many LOL's.

Hope you stay involved.

Mike. mikemikev (talk) 0849, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

> Hi Faye.

Hi, Mike! And thank you for your kind words of encouragement. They're literally the first I've ever gotten here.

> I think Mathsci's obviously biased noisemaking won't have much effect.

It will, since

a) he has political power at WP

b) he's got credibility as a Man of Science, and

c) he's biased in the wrong direction (i.e., biased not to tell the truth).

Ironically, my EMOTIONAL bias is just the same as his -- I want everybody to be real smart--though they'd quickly discover that it's more of a curse than a blessing. Ever wonder why that retarded kid is always smiling? For the same reason the smart kid isn't.

But sadly, God decided to fuck with us (again), and made the IQ distribution correlate with race. It is often difficult to maintain my intellectual dicipline as I push for the exposure of facts I wish weren't true, and when people call me a "racist", it makes that MUCH more difficult, because I understand how they feel--I feel that way too. It's like the ACLU Jews who stood up for the nazis' right to march in Skokie, Illinois. That must have taken AMAZING integrity, and I don't know if I could have done it.

> Mathsci appears to be arguing that mediation is compromised because the article has been slightly vandalised.

But Ludwig doesn't have any control over the article, just the mediation. Right?

> If anything it's had the opposite effect of spurring Ludwig into a 'no more Mr. Nice Guy' mode, which will help cut through the nonsense and hasten the inevitable implementation of the factual rather than PC article.

It will have the OPPOSITE effect. He will "get tough" on ME. Wanaponda will still be allowed to make his content-free, incoherent objections with impunity because ludwig, like everyone else, fears being labeled "racist:". At first I thought he was doing it on purpose, a fellow Liberal cynically and deliberately tripping up this explosively-controversial article (like slrubenstein does), or possibly, that he was a troll getting his jollies by derailing conversations, or a kid pretending to be a grownup.

But after seeing Wanaponda's astounding dimwittedness during his outrageous attempt to get me banned, and his failure to see that the admins were literally laughing at him (they [http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikipediaTROUT slaspped him in the face with a dead fish]), I once again experienced the horror I first discovered in elementary school: "Jee-zusss Christ, all the other kids aren't just PRETENDING to be stupid because they think it's funny--they really ARE that stupid!" That was a real, real bummer for me, and I thought I was invulnerable to it after all these years in the god-forsaken, post-college nightmare the adults created.

Like, I was proud of myself for not freaking out when I read that the Taliban make farmers put underpants on farm animals because sex is "evil". But I guess the way normal people are still sometimes takes me by surprise.

> Incidentally, may I take this opportunity to thank you for your invaluable input. Your courageous ultra-straightalking approach is a perfect counterweight to expose the ultra-PC crowd

But it doesn't matter. Half the group thinks I'm a racist (which I'm not) and the other half thinks I'm crazy (which I am). All my rhetoric will do is lend a false patina of considered debate to the biased final article.

> and allowed the formation of a more middle-ground plan, which I think is the way to go.

That's like saying "you can teach that evolution is a theory, but you have to say that it's just the way god created his wonderful Plan".

What's this "middle-ground" plan include? That we can say American blacks have an average IQ of 80, but not that Africans test at 70?

That "some" scientists "may" believe that in every country tested, blacks have smaller average brain size, but not that MRI studies have established it so conclusively that it isn't even controversial anymore? Researchers refer to it casually, as just another fact--even though they never EVER talk about it outside of academia. But will the cerebral anomaly be suppressed and the article say (as it does now) that nobody has any idea why the IQ gap exists?

> Also your style provides many LOL's.

Except that I'm not trying to be funny. You'd think that as a geek, I'd be used to being treated as a joke.

Hope you stay involved.

No, actually, I'm trying to keep out of it from now on. I haven't posted anything in the serious discussion in days. I made a really good attempt at breaking the issues down into discrete statements, each of which can be voted up or down. That took all night to do, and it seemed to be making a lot of progress. But when Ludwuig deleted it all, I realized that my effort to make wikipedia something more than what Fox News says it is is a fool's errand.

What bothers me most is that I was raised to believe that "smart" people are supposed to help the other people who excel at different but equally necessary tasks. Like, we design safe bridges and the truck drivers transport the food and everybody wins and is happy.

Wapanonda can be excused because he just doesn't know any better. Similarly, I blame Cheney but not Bush since Bush didn't even understand what was going on. Blaming the simpleminded for being stupid is like blaming children for not being grownups.

But mathsci sliced ludwig to pieces for failing to delete a list of statements which had appeared in the peer-reviewed academic journal "Intelligence"

"a synthesis from a single questionable source (Richard Lynn) made its way into the article Race and intelligence. I'm afraid this kind of writing reminds me of what can be read on far right websites like Stormfront."

Stormfront is a bizarre neo-nazi hate site. Richard Lynn is a Professor Emeritus of Psychology and one of the top cognitive scientists in the world.

When craven, dishonest cowards like mathsci and rubenstein and ludwig deliberately suppress the truth and substitute lies, IT DOESN'T COME FREE. There is a horrible cost to pay, and the innocent pay it. We end up with black kids who try hard and work at 100% capacity being labeled as "underachievers", like there's something wrong with them. Affirmative action resulted in really smart black people having their co-workers assume (validly, from experience) that they're probably incompetent.

And the ones who dedicate their lives to helping these people (motivated fellow-liberals who teach in poor schools) endure the terrible wrath of a society which has been lied to. In Rhode Island, they FIRED EVERY TEACHER IN THE SCHOOL because they couldn't raise the test scores of the black kids, so everyone assumes they must be racist--just like everyone assumes I must be racist here at Wikipedia.

I'd even be willing to put up with it if I could actually do something to help society, but I understand everything and control NOTHING. That's the curse of being "Really Smart". As a computer manager for a small company in the 80's, I all but got on my knees and begged the (millionaire) owner to buy a $100 tape backup for the server, which had never been backed-up in eight years. A month later, the server crashed, taking all the company records with it. I was so depressed I could hardly drive to work the next day. "What could I have done differently? Should I have paid for the backup unit myself?"

When I got to work, I was fired in front of everybody because they all assumed I had sabotaged it to prove I was right.

Year after year, decade after decade, I have to stand idly by and watch people picking flowers on the train tracks be killed horribly because I'm the only one who can perceive the train, and when I warn them, I'm told in no uncertain terms to shut the hell up.

Well once again, I AM shutting the hell up. Rubenstein and ludwig and mathsci won, as people like them have always won. And, as always, it's innocent who will suffer for it.

But if you're curious as to why an award-winning nuclear engineer would just walk off her job and live naked in a cave in the woods, THAT'S why because it hurts too much to see everyone else hurting each other--and therefore, themselves. TechnoFaye Kane 20:42, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Faye: let me tell you now that I have no intention of getting particularly tough on you. If you think I am, or that I am not being equally tough on Wanaponda, then please leave a note on my talk page and I WILL fix it. And please don't put me in the same boat with Mathsci - I do not get along well with him at all.

My aim right now is to produce a conflict-free mediation - that's it - and I'm going to be vigilant about potential sources of conflict from whatever corner they come from. Please don't feel like I'm singling you out. I personally would very much like you to continue contributing, because I think your contribution is valuable: I just want you to contribute in a calm, focused way. If I tend to refactor more of your material it's only because you tend to go off-topic a lot, and I am more than willing to work with you to help you focus down to what needs to be discussed.

what was it you said about Asimov and the editing process?

stick with it, keep focused, and allow me to help you with any problems you see before they get out of hand. ok? --Ludwigs2 21:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Faye, what's with all the black text on a white background, huh? I noticed you still haven't provided a single example of white text on a black background. If you're going to display this kind of blatant, inflammatory bias in your use of text formatting, I think we will have a very hard time working together. I'm very tempted to post a complaint about you at ANI. --Aryaman (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

there 's a draft of an outline at Wikipedia_talk:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2009-11-12/Race_and_Intelligence#Proposed_outline. You have not yet commented on it, and I am preparing to give the outline to David.Kane (per current agreement in mediation) to enter a draft of the article in mainspace. There will be a review/revision period after the draft is entered in which any issues can be addressed, so if you have no immediate comment, or can't get to the mediation page to make a comment, you can participate in the review and we can address any concerns you still have there.

sorry for the bulk message. --Ludwigs2 11:03, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]