Talk:Gang of Four

From RationalWikiWiki

This is a little strong. Might we tone it down slightly? ~ Pink 04:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

why? it's accurate.

the purpose of Rationalwikiwiki is to be antagonistic, not give token criticism to rwians then reassure them they're doing a great job. like it or not, there are real problem with the rw, and this wiki's purpose it to draw attention to and criticize them. --Test ^fail 05:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I thought this was a bit extreme so I've created Nag of Four for a bit of balance.--False Flag 11:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Am I right that all of these are English? Is this significant?--False Flag 20:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The Pink/Francine tag team is tempting me to join my (ex) countryfolk and request membership, totally screwing up the meme. Whoever heard of a "Gang of Five"??? They're all British because, in general, Europe is 100 years ahead of the US, in issues of this sort. They got sick of fighting wars over religion, so they got over it. The US, on the other hand... Human 04:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] English

Am I allowed edit this? I'd just like to point out that I'm Welsh .... not English. so the line should read - "They are all believed to be British". Thank you.--Bob M 22:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

This is probably just the American misconception that "British=English". Phantom Hoover 22:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nomination section

I propose the following course of action:

1. Swap out SusanG for Toast, who is under heavy suspicion of being her sock.
2. Swap out Bob M, who is definitely on the moderate end on this subject, for TheoryOfPractice, who, er, is not.

— ListenerX 21:10, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I suspect that you do not know all of the history of Bob M's posts - and for that matter his occasional history of conflict with TOP over this very subject. On the other hand TOP is British, so that would be in keeping.--False Flag 21:21, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

TOP is Canadian. 217.171.129.nn 21:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

If Bob M was immoderate on this subject before I joined the Wiki, no, I do not know about it; he has always been very reasonable with me. I do know that TOP has become an antitheist lately and exhibited his characteristic short fuse in that area. — ListenerX 02:43, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

TOP has a short fuse? he looks patient to me --Test ^fail 02:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I hope that was a joke... ListenerX 03:16, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

nope --Test ^fail 03:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

His own article here has a few examples. I was myself a close observer to the controversy over one of his long blocks of Fall down, right after I was sysoped. — ListenerX 04:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

i guess i have a higher tolerance. after watching susanG and RA for a year, TOP's dramatics are minor-league --Test ^fail 05:02, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If anybody is interested in TOP and I presenting our points of view some time ago, a good place might be the two essays: Why religion is bullshit which I originally co-wrote but eventually took my name off, and TOP's counter-essay A Rational Approach to Dealing with Religion and Society. As usual, the talk pages are probably more informative than the essays. (Mmmmm, now I look at it again, interesting capitalisation in that title.) --Bob M 09:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

My inclination would be to leave TOP as a wannabe in case he has another change of heart.--False Flag 18:36, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nag of Four

Since you're updating these, the current "Nag of Four" consists of three currently absent members, plus RA. weaseLICIOuS ^{Bite Me} 11:49, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes we need to do that. It's on the article page and the talk page. Where I see you are already active.--False Flag 18:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)