Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/ZAROVE/Evidence

message: Here's some collected evidence. 
^^James^^ 11:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:^^James^^/evidence|Evidence]]

message: I will probably regret getting involved, but Zarove asked me to take a look at this, and I feel like someone needs to point out the bad faith behavior of two of his accusers as well. I was originally drawn to the acharya page at the request of James' complaints that she was being endangered by the publication of her name. This was the first of many downright dishonest claims he has made, including the claim of no relationship with her, and the twisting of criticism into threats. Lobo specialized in misrepresentation of the actions of a series of administrators who tried to mediate or settle the dispute. Both have displayed such a dogged mindless aggressiveness against any criticism of her preposterous website and books as to convince me beyond any doubt that they have some sort of close relationship with her that they will not reveal. In the first month of the dispute Zarove's postings were open and honest in terms of perspective and motivations compared to theirs.
My criticisms were entirely of the silly claims of the website and ridiculous contrast between acharya's combative stance and empty puffery ("greatest religious philosopher of the age") and the dishonest claims that she needed to be "protected" by anonymity from Christians trying to do her harm. I lost interest as it became clear that neither James nor Lobo possessed any trace of ability to engage in reasoned debate despite James' hysterical expressions of fear for her safety or Lobo's pretensions that her derivative compendia published by a press that specialized in UFO and nazi mystical looniness constitute serious academic research despite being completely ignored by all serious academic scholars of religious history. 
I had no interest in her private life beyond the already public name behind the pseudonym, and do not defend any threats of publication of personal information. These apparently happened after I dropped out.
The problem is that I stopped reading the numbingly repetitive drivel months ago and I'd rather undergo a root canal than dig back through the muck looking for specific diffs in the history to illustrate what I described here. So write me off if you need to, but notice that neither James nor el Lobo will permit the article to describe her website and books in a way that actually reflects the flavor of what you will see if you go look at it or them. Do not take their allegations at face value. alteripse 02:16, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: James and Lobo are little better

message: The whole idea of including diffs is to prevent people from muddying the water with baseless accusations as you have done above. For example, I have never denied being in contact with Acharya S. 
I still maintain that publishing Acharyas name against her wishes is wrong. I think controversial writers on religion have a legitimate reason to be concerned for their saftey. The recent muslim cartoon controversy should make this abundantly clear. She also has personal reasons to be concerned for her privacy. As you know, Acharyas full name was private information until Zarove made it public, here on wikipedia. Where do you think he got her full name?
Pointing out how Zarove threatened to publish a persons credit history, grades and court records is hardly "twisting criticism into threats". Suggesting so is a twist in itself. 
^^James^^ 21:43, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply to Alteripse

message: -
I certainly hope you regret it... if for no other reason than that of conscience, speaking of bad faith behavior, of course.   
You were drawn to it at the request of James???? I quoted you and crazyeddie... what can possibly a misrepresentation of that? 
Mine is not a mindless aggressiveness... it is simple, debate club methodology. I quoted Zarove's first and subsequent entries and there is no way it was not slanted to deny the books while trying to make the author appear as some amateur and "Since I think we're both of the "Acharya S is a quack" POV" who didn't know what they were talking about... How about this from your own talk page? 
"I say we oughta take off and nuke it from orbit - it's the only way to be sure. Any ideas how? crazyeddie 06:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reply to Alteripse 2