"

Letter to User:Zoe

The world of Wikipedia is not what it should be and would be if people would not INITIATE personal attacks while correcting possible or actual violations of The Five Pillars of Wikipedia. The first round of Word Wars against me began all because I dared write about myself an article. Sure, call it self-promotion, but self-aggrandizement it is not. I was not fully aware of the rules then, but the fact is that there are people, not unlike myself, who are worthy of mention on Wikipedia, have sufficient write-ups, press coverage throughout the years or were a significant phenomena at a time, but who: a) cannot afford to hire PR and Publicity firms to have someone write about them on Wikipedia or b) would not impose upon their prominent friends to do so! Wikipedia should have a Special Cases Department, just as government should, were certain exceptional individuals can have their day in ""Wiki Court"", and have a determination made by a ""Wiki Jury"" as to whether or not they deserve a mention in Wikipedia. In any case, Alec Wilkinson, of New Yorker magazine fame, intends on writing an article about me for Wikipedia, partly out of fairness, since there is mention of Amy Alkon and her two partners in plagiarism. Amy Alkon, Advice Goddess, was one of the Three Free Advice Ladies. They read my write-up in The New Yorker and attempted to become famous at my expense! Until that time my life as The Free Advice Man was quite fulfilling, and I managed to help many people, including some on the verge of suicide. You may want to visit www.infinitysociety.org/FREEADVICEMAN.html to get the full story. Why does this matter?? Because, while it is true that I may have violated Wiki Rules in the past, which I no longer seek to do (as of Tom Harrison's warning), Wikipedia could benefit from an eccentric contributor. Yes I was and I am very angry to find that there are Wikipedians who will make unscientific statements about another person's intellectual accomplishments and worth.  Yes it is likely that there are people who go too far in enforcing the NO ORIGINAL CONTENT pillar. I am astounded that no one ever cared then (neither User:Trovatore, User:MikeTwo, or any of the current Wikipedians involved in this case) or now to make a sincere effort to contact Prof. Miklos Hernadi at The Hungarian Academy of Sciences, who will verify my status as a philosopher and who is aware of media reports in Hungary about my life as a philosopher from 1994 to 2002, including a published book of mine for which he wrote a Peer Review (he has a Ph.D.). And should Alec Wilkinson submit an article about me there should be no reason for it to be deleted. 

Look, I am 42 years of age and more European than American. Maybe Wikipedia is age-blind, but people who are younger, and perhaps less accomplished in life, should take the other person's age into consideration and communicate in a respectful and polite manner. If you analyze the whole matter, and if you are seriously interested in objectivity and making the world a better place, then you may yet come to the understanding that I never initiated any attacks, even though I did overreact at times. Also, about anti-Semitism... When someone attacks me, who really does not know me, my life's story and the reasons why the media has covered me, and dares claim that I am practically a ""nobody"" then my reactions are perfectly understandable and given that the strong appearance of malice exists, why should I, as a Jew, not conclude, especially about persons who openly admit strong Christian identities with Christian groups that have a known track record for being anti-Jewish. Maybe CRCulver is not aware of his hate for the concept of infinity, which is my specialty and to which I profess my intellectual support for. Maybe he is not an anti-Semite, but he sure did not communicate to me (right from the beginning) as one would normally expect. As for promoting certain views and ideas; most Wikipedians and people working on Wikipedia do this all the time! Some more subtly than others. 

Anyway, you've blocked me indefinitely... Who benefits?? Look: I never went around looking to insult Wikipedians over their violations or mistakes; I never deleted information (because I think that there should be people in Wikipedia assigned for that sort of thing, and those should not be the same as those who add information!!!); .....in fact, come to think of it, that is a great idea! People who do the verifying of facts should not be those who write them...separation of Wikipowers!.... Anyway, adding an article titled ""Infinitology"" is not violating the ""NO ORIGINAL CONTENT"" pillar, because nowhere in that article did I talk about my name or my identity (other than being the author), and in fact talked about such prominent individuals, living and deceased, as Philip K. Dick, Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan, Giordano Bruno, Baruch Spinoza, etc.... Anyway,