I don't visit Wikimedia often, so if you want to make sure that i see your message quickly, please post it on en:User_talk:SebastianHelm. — SebastianHelm 04:33, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, however, ...Edit

Hi SebastianHelm. To clarify, I asked for comments without foundation to be substantiated or withdrawn, there was no sole request for them to be withdrawn. I value all opinions, however, feel that if people are going to express them that there is a higher value for those based on evidence, rather than sly condemnation.

If I am going to be character assassinated, I think that it is only fair to ask for some level of foundation or evidence. Putting oneself up for an election for steward should not be seen as opportunity to deride someone, especially where someone who has no personal knowledge of the person, nor taken the opportunity to make a factual assessment. I am here to do tasks; there is no glory, and I have no qualms if I am elected or not, that is the community's choice.

Please also note that I did open a specific discussion about this on User talk:Xania, as I thought that a long-winded rebuttal on the Votes page was not the means to broach the discussion. Thanks for your consideration. billinghurst sDrewth 00:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how I can help you. It is completely natural in any election, or even in any system where people decide about candidates, that they will have all sorts of opinions about the candidates. It is understood that these are opinions, unless they are backed up, and there is no policy that requires these to be sourced. As I wrote, you have good endorsements. It didn't occur to anyone to write under statements like "Trusted Wikisourcerer!" something like "Please take this back or source it!" No, we all just see such statements for what they are: Personal opinions. Everybody understands that, when OrbiliusMagister writes "trusted", it just means that he trusts you, since he can't make a statement for everyone. Likewise, when Xania writes "you seem to ... want", then everybody understands that that's just what she thinks of you, because she doesn't know what you really want. Even she herself acknowledges that with the word "seem". I don't see that as a "character assassination", because she makes no false claims about you. She just gives her opinion, and she has a right to it, like anyone else.
The reason why I voted against you was not that I was swayed by Xania's opinion, but because I found your reaction to it inappropriate. I am disappointed that that didn't come across from my statement. I really wish you could see that; it would help both you and those that you work with in a team collaboration like Wikimedia. SebastianHelm 02:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I understood the basis for your vote and the commentary around it, and totally okay with it, and it did come across in your subsequent statement. You are correct my above statement is a little hyperbolic, and I retract it. I believe that evidence is that I do work well in a team environment. We may need to differ slightly around opinions and their expression where they come from one's experience, rather than supposition. Again, thanks again for your thoughts. billinghurst sDrewth 03:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
I believe that you must have had positive team experiences; the endorsements by some editors whom I trust attest that - even without sources. But your reply to Xania was a counterexample. You obviously didn't achieve your stated goal for her to back up or retract her statement. That goal was within reach; she actually did just that in Mercy's case! Granted, there is a difference between Mercy's and your case. In Mercy's case, Xania's statement was a factual one, not just an opinion. Still, your reply would have probably been the same, if not harsher. We don't know how Xania would have reacted; given that it was a factual statement, it is possible that she would have taken it back, just as she did for Mercy. But it is not unlikely that she would have reacted with the same indignation about your demand. So the difference in achieving this goal was not the situation, but the attitude. SebastianHelm 18:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Xania did post what he/she considered their evidence and I left it for others to determine the basis of their influence upon them. I was not out to pick a fight, I just wished for what I considered derisory to be supported, as best they could, or withdrawn, and they added. I am not against expressed opinions, whether I agree is a different issue; and I aim for win-win solutions. I am okay with it. :-) billinghurst sDrewth 02:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh yes, so she did; I stand corrected. I read it and forgot it, because the "part of the system" argument seems just absurd to me. That wasn't really a win-win outcome, though; or at least not as good as if she had changed her mind and had considered you a good guy after all. I don't know if that was possible in that case, but if it was, then not with the way you demanded it. SebastianHelm 03:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I am not going to be very active on meta for some time; if you or anyone else wants to leave a message here, please alert me at en:user talk:SebastianHelm. SebastianHelm 05:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)