Still working to recover. Please don't edit quite yet.

User talk:Zazaban

From Anarchopedia
Revision as of 11:44, 15 February 2008 by RoyceChristian (Talk | contribs) (fixing up formatting errors)

Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome

Greetings and welcome to Anarchopedia, the anarchist knowledge portal! I hope you enjoy our community and participate in our mutual work.

Here are some tips to get you started:

  • If in doubt, be bold and do it in the way you think will help the most people.
  • Many Wikipedia things apply, such as
    • To sign posts on "Talk/Discussion Pages" use '~' symbol. Use ~~~ (3 tildes) or ~~~~ (4 tildes) to insert your name or name and timestamp respectively.
  • We, however, are not Wikipedia, and therefore expect wider range of articles. You can help by moving articles in danger of censorship from WP here.
  • Please note that we try to keep our naming convention case sensitive. Examine the difference between moon and Moon, mercury and Mercury etc.
  • If you copy the article from Wikipedia, please be aware, that although you can do that you must provide a reference. Do so by adding {{wikipedia|Name of the article on wikipedia.}} at the very end of your article.
  • Check out articles with downloadable files, Wikipedia would never allow such an expression of free exchange of ideas.

Some more information:

Thank you for your time, comrade.  ~ User:Beta_M (VolodyA! V Anarhist) Talk 2007 November 28 06:13 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, Thanks for a heads-up. Some things to keep in mind in case if you didn't know them already. There is a chat on #anarchopedia on irc.indymedia.org server of Internet Relay Chat. Also there is an e-mail list for Anarchopedia which you might want to join. However, please keep in mind that it was decided that all the issues will from now on be discussed on the wiki itself so that everything is transparent and we can't be accused of having a hidden hierarchy.  ~ User:Beta_M (VolodyA! V Anarhist) Talk 2007 December 7 16:27 (UTC)

Comrade

The term was most definitely not used as defined in USSR. Here it meant a member of the Communist Party.  ~ User:Beta_M (VolodyA! V Anarhist) Talk 2007 December 11 09:14 (UTC)

Ubuntu GNU/Linux

Not only is this the proper and correct way of calling it, but this is what i've heard it called on multiple ocasions. In fact if you look at the actual system, it makes more sense to call it Ubuntu GNU than Ubuntu Linux.  ~ User:Beta_M (VolodyA! V Anarhist) Talk 2008 February 4 06:02 (UTC)

And, it is very sad to hear that some users of GNU/Linux have never even heard of GNU or rms, but have heard of Linus Torvalds and Linux.
The system is GNU/Linux, by the way. RMS and the GNU team built an operating system based on Unix, and they hade made everything – but a kernel. Their proposed kernel, GNU/HURD, was made more complicated than it should have been. Linus Torvalds just did the kernel in the early ninties, and the GNU developers just happened to need a kernel, so they came across each other. Now, greedy Linus Torvalds just wants to promote the whole thing as "Linux", like he was the only one. And since RMS doesn't do the corporate advertisement bullshit, many people never hear of him and just call it Linux, because Linus Torvalds does do corporate advertisement.This is one of the reasons why property is theft (because by taking it for you and only you, or proclaiming it yours, you are stealing from the rest of the people who own it, and stealing for the rest of the developers, respectively). Anonymity 08:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, and my talk page is not a forum. Every time somebody edits this page a message pops up on my screen. Zazaban 19:38, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

"Argument that"

Hi, i see the reason for the move... i think there needs to be some sort of standard as to the naming convention of the arguments. Look at Category:Arguments, there are quite a few of them by now, mostly about veganism, and i'm thinking about expanding that to more arguments. As i can think of no better naming convention, i'll go and move all the pages accordingly.  ~ User:Beta_M (VolodyA! V Anarhist) Talk 2008 February 5 08:32 (UTC)

Sysop Status

Please change my status for sysop, because I am doing ips block spam and anarchopedias offenses in all, I am sysop and bureaucrat of the meta and developer in anarchopedia in Portuguese. Thanks Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt 10:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not sure how to do that. Zazaban 15:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi! It's simple you just go on special pages, then management of privileges of users and inserts my nickname and click sysop or administrator and save ok? Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt 16:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, when I go there I get an error message. Zazaban 23:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
Made you a sysop, Sir Lestaty de Lioncourt.  ~ User:Beta_M (VolodyA! V Anarhist) Talk 2008 February 12 06:52 (UTC)

Pushing an anarcho-capitalist point of view and reverting User:KropotkinInBlack's edits

It seems that you are pushing a capitalist point of view ("anarcho" capitalist or "libertarian" capitalist to be specific), reverting KropotkinInBlack's valid edits, and claiming censorship. Your biased version of the article what anarchism is not that you revert to contains things biased to an anarcho-capitalist Point of View. Most prominently this:

Most Anarchists (including Anarcho-Capitalists and free-market Anarchists) dismiss this notion on the grounds that the smallest possible state means no state, effectively making Big "L" libertarians 'cowardly' Anarchists.

, which infers that anarcho-capitalism is a form of anarchism. While I admit my bias is leftism (which classical anarchism has its roots in, not just anarcho-socialism), you make edits that reflect your point of view. Another thing noted is this (on the article anarcho-capitalism:

Anarcho-capitalism is a view that departs from Anarcho-socialist theory in that it regards only the state as unnecessary and harmful to human society. In its embrace of capitalist economics, Anarcho-capitalism contradicts classical anarchism, which historically and currently has been anti-capitalist. Social anarchists generally argue that anarcho-capitalism isn't a form of anarchism at all, as it differs on what constitutes illegitimate hierarchy, often denying a central basis of classical anarchist theory that advocates the abolition of all hierarchy. Anarcho-socialists generally believe that capitalism cannot exist without enforcement of an economic class system, thus it is impossible to remove coercive hierarchical relationships from a capitalist system. Being based in liberalism, Anarcho-capitalism holds that individuals should be free to compete with other individuals. L. Susan Brown, an anarcha-feminist, noted that this belief in competition means that individuals are free to take advantage of one another in order to satisfy an ends, rather than granting individuals freedom for the sake of freedom.

, which makes it seem like the only anarchists who oppose "anarcho"-capitalism are anarcho-socialists, which seems like a good but not-so-clever way to make it seem that only a small group of anarchists critisize "libertarian" capitlaism.

While I'm not a believer in NPOV, I do think all opinions should be welcomed and the text of an article should not be changed to match your point of view. At least indicate that this is your viewpoint by putting it in a separate section and signing.

--Anonymity 07:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Anonymity, KiB was a frustrating poster here who, although I think was genuine in his concern, was extremely overzealous and confused not attacking a philosophy with supporting it. Both me an Zazaban tried to negotiate with him suggesting a possible cooperation, but he would not here of it instead turning much of his post into rant. There was little information contained within his edits. Originally the 'what anarchism is not' article was immature, as was Kropotkins edits. I'm an Agorist. Please do not confuse this with your standard Anarcho-Capitalist. The first quote where I distinguish between different types of libertarianism was supposed to provide a clear distinction between the 'Americanised' usage by designating it with a L and the European with a l. I was not insinuating anything (in fact I was trying to keep things as unbiased as possible and merely trying to point out that Anarcho-Capitalists as well as other market Anarchists reject them. If there is some common ground between Anarcho-Capitalists and, as many here would put it, the vast majority of Anarchists, what is wrong with that?
The latter block you quoted was a clean up of a previous contribution. If you want to further add to it, go ahead. I tried not to add or remove anything and to get to the point of the matter. I realise it is a social Anarchist criticism of Anarcho-Capitalism so I tried not to go either way - I try not to edit things that don't reflect my views. It's just that the original piece needed a clean up and no one else seemed to be bothered.--RoyceChristian 11:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


Well, sorry for misunderstanding about your philosophy. To me, zir edits do not seem to be rants, and not attacks on anarcho-capitalism. Now, why did you change "classical anarchists" to "anarcho-socialists"? Traditionally, anarchists are anti-capitalists, for the capitalist system has a hierarchy, and it should be abolished beacuse of that. The class/economic hierarchy. I am not an anarcho-socialist (although I do have socialist influences, I also have influences from liberalism and other forms of anarchism), but I believe "anarcho-capitalists" are actually capitalists who hold objectivist and Randian views, and just want to base the whole world on a capitalist mmonetary system and go into an anti-democratic WTO plan. So, I think instead of claiming censorship, you should talk it out with KropotkinInBlack, who I don't think is a POV pusher myself.
And this doesn't look like a rant or an attack (keep in mind my bias, though), so why did you remove it?
The word "libertarian" is rightfully a synonym for anarchism, especially used in repressive times when the term "anarchy" will get a person in trouble, But capitalists in the USA have (for the time being) managed to convince people there are two definitions which are often separated by the geographical regions of North America and Europe.

--Anonymity 19:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I was the one who originally used 'classical' for lack of a better word in an attempt to try and avoid insulting people. I am aware of the whole 'tradition' thing, but that is your argument to include, like I said, I only tried to clean up what was there originally - before KiB started editing. I'm not going to argue, here at lest, your predisposition to Anarcho-Capitalists but though they retain an Ayn Rand influence, they are definitely not Objectivists and definitely not Randroids. I've dealt with both kinds an Anarcho-Capitalists are not either. I will argue that we need to represent Anarcho-Capitalism accurately and not smear it with false labels.
The Problem with KiB's edits was the body of them was mostly rants or uninformative. What he did say that was of value had already b been said more accurately, though it could possibly be worked in. Additionally, towards the end we tried another attempt at negotiating, but KiB had already left.

--RoyceChristian 11:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://eng.anarchopedia.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Zazaban&oldid=30755"