Thread:User talk:Geofferybard/Netiquette/reply (7)

I thought you might respect him as much as most Americans do. Albeit I have met Czechs who don't like him. The point being I am enroute to an engagement and want to parse my contributions to make sure I have not messed anything up. I thought that pointing to the message of hope with which your countryman has dazzled the world might inspire you to ratchet back the impulse to polemicize and we could defer the discussion until Monday. I don't know about you but as far as I am concerned Vaclav Havel has made some awesome good points in comparison to which all of the argumentation and disputation looks quite pointless. Many of the items you are lecturing about have already been covered. I need to get away from this monitor sometime before now and the great day of judgment. Part of the problem is the lack of focus and prioritization. When I address concerns, some of which are not entirely spurious, new ones come in at a faster rate...for instance Mg complains about a question or a suggestion I made on my own sandbox as though it was an attempt to usurp...I think Jeff is indicating by his silence that he, unlike most others, is more concerned with the work of this wiki than the jumping in. And he sees some real quality work in my definitions, such as correction of just the most egregious misinformation at Hinayana, or the omission of legitimate Calvinist idiom, and the dire need of someone to work on this wiki who has at least the ability to do well researched work on Tibetan Buddhist terminology. Which, having done transcription work for probably some of the leading Buddhist scholars in the world, I do possess. But rather than focus on streamlining the learning curve I get an endless succession of hostile challenges accusing me of everything short of blood libel, causing the Tsunami, and disrespecting the Holy Virgin. It just never ends. There have been two or three helpful people, and Jeff K was very cool about things once he could see that I do, in point of fact, usually have at least as good or better idea of what I am talking about than most of the nitpickers. And frankly I think that the message of hope by your countryman V Havel warrant your attention, because you are so caught up with litigiousness that you are putting your capacity to be a visionary in jeopardy. You could probably be a prominent translator if you transcended but you need to be able to latch onto a humanitarian vision rather than a technocratic skill. If you can't do better by a newbie to your boards than this gauntlet run of primarily inflated or unjustified criticism, you are wasting your talent and the world will lose potentially one of its finest interpreters of Havel, perhaps also Jan Huss and others. But no.