User talk:Avidor

• User talk:Avidor/archive

Just to talk

Hey. Putting old conflicts aside, and noting that I know I've been a pompous ass toward you (also noting I think you've been the same to me), I'd be very interested in constructively discussing PRT with an opponent. You're obviously a very adement opponent, and I'd like to hear what you think in a more calm context than a wikipedia talk page. Perhaps you'll convince me of something. What do you say? Fresheneesz 06:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Fine ignore my friendly request. This simply proves to me that you don't care about transportation, you just care about your agenda. I'm not going around saying light rail is a scam, or that heavy rail is a scam, or busses or anything. However all those things lose money, and produce some sort of drain on our economy. This is your argument for what a PRT system would do - the same thing that current systems do. I'm disappointed that you're such an unkind person. Fresheneesz 22:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Comic

Amusing comic! Two things though: I think you misspelled assassinate and sisyphean, and the Seigenthaler thing was about both John and Robert Kennedy (and it didn't say that he did kill them, just that he was suspected of it, and that nothing was ever proven.) --maru (talk) contribs 23:47, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

If this comic is what you think of Wikipedia, then why do you waste your time here? pstudier 01:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello Avidor. Please note that I've removed the GFDL license tag. It cannot be both public domain and licensed. :) // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 02:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Nice comic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:WikedpediaRKB.jpg . Are you a Wikipedia critic?

He is now. The comic made it onto wikipedia-watch.org/usatoday.html

Invitation

The Mediation Cabal

You are a disputant in a case listed under Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases. We invite you to be a mediator in a different case. Please read How do I get a mediator assigned to my case? for more information.
~~~~

--Fasten 16:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

barnstar

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		The great Roadkill Bill in Wikipedia comic. It gave me some good laughs and described the fallout of the controversey in a nutshell. Hbdragon88 03:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Comic does not equal bio

I noticed, Ken, that somebody put a {{Notable Wikipedian}} on Talk:Roadkill Bill . You are not notable, you comic strip is, so I subst'ed it and reworded and took out the assocaited category. -- 75.24.105.157 05:13, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Mark Douglas Olson

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Avidor! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 01:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

This user has a direct conflict of interest in edits to here entry. All edits should be reviewed for neutrality.

Not good

Nobody likes a sore winner. You got what you wanted in Minnesota, now please take the trouble to read WP:LIVING and see how very very careful you have to be about biographies of living individuals. A bit of light-hearted banter over PRT is one thing, wading into the personalities quite another. Rep. Olson qualifies for inclusion under WP:BIO, I am undecided on Zimmerman, I don't thin k Anderson is notable per our guidelines and you really are giving the guy a hard time just for doing what he does. So what if he designs PRT systems? That's not a crime.

So, please take more care, or you will be at risk of being run out of town. This is the friendly warning, OK? Guy (Help!) 23:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

"The moving finger writes and having writ moves on."Avidor 02:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:NOT a forum

Please see WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a forum. You have stated that you are against PRT and apparently against Mark Olson. That is fine; but it is conflict of interest if you promote your interests in a POV way. Please see the Olson discussion and reach consensus on including the deleted sentence on Zimmerman. — ERcheck (talk) 01:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I came across this article as a result of your report on the Conflict of Interest noticeboard. Please see the response. — ERcheck (talk) 01:06, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I have a point of view, but I have no conflict of interest. I don't belong to an organization, nor would I make any profit from my edits. It would be the same if I edited an article on Intelligent Design or any proponent of ID. If you are so concerned about COI, you ought to take a look at who edited Mark Douglas Olson today, a "resident fellow of the American Enterprise Institute".... Avidor 01:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. See WP:COI — A Wikipedia conflict of interest (COI) is an incompatibility between the aim of Wikipedia, which is to produce a neutral encyclopedia, and the aims of an individual editor.. You don't have to belong to an organization or make a profit from your edits. You clearly are against PRT and thus, if you use Wikipedia to promote your views, you have a COI. — ERcheck (talk) 01:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC) BTW, when you report others, your actions/edits are also reviewed. — ERcheck (talk) 01:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Wrong. Being against something isn't COI... otherwise only people who condoned torture could edit a page on torture. If you have a problem with my edits, please take it up with an administrator.Avidor 02:47, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Avidor, as I mentioned above, I came across the Olson article when reading the Conflict of Interest report that you made. I am an administrator; please read the response to your report. Having interest in a topic is not necessarily a problem, it is when your interest conflict with those of Wikipedia. — ERcheck (talk) 03:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a link?Avidor 03:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's a bona fide case of COI... Bill James is editing the personal rapid transit article and he's the head of the J-POD PRT company[1]Avidor 04:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

24 hour block

This account has been blocked from editing for 24 hours for violation of WP:NPA.[2] Durova^Charge! 16:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Per discussion on WP:AN, I have unblocked this user. --Richard 17:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Richard beat me to the unblock, but I'd like to add that it might be a good idea in the future not to dredge up diffs from over a year ago as evidence in a dispute... just a though.--Isotope23 17:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

And also it's a good idea to bury the hatchet and forget old grudges. A repetition of the personal attack of calling another editor a troll might earn you another block which won't be lifted so quickly. --Richard 18:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Old grudges? This is from today-[3]This guy follows me everywhere on the internet and even has a blog about me-[4] The guy even attacks me on his Wikipedia user page-[5] Atren is a troll and if you want to block me for stating that, go ahead... it's the truth. That's what Wikipedia gets for allowing anonymous people to "edit" articles. The Seattle PI forum banned ATren for ranting about me... Wikipedia should too.Avidor 18:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't follow Avidor - I follow PRT discussions, and I debunk that which I know to be blatantly false about PRT. It just happens that just about every misleading statement on PRT seems to come from him, which is not surprising given that his name is practically synonymous with the anti-PRT movement. My blog is simply an aggregation of posts debunking Ken's anti-PRT campaign. He insists on making it personal, but the only thing "personal" is that he doesn't like when I contradict his ongoing campaign with hard facts. ATren 19:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to ignore the use of the word "troll" above. Look, if you have a problem with ATren's behavior on Wikipedia (and that's all that's actionable here), then issue an "editor conduct" request for comment on him. Otherwise, please avoid personal attacks including characterizing him as a "troll". You are entitled to your own personal opinion but inflammatory language disrupts rather than informs. --Richard 20:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough Richard. Incidentally, Atren above refers to an "anti-PRT movement." Is there anything about an "anti-PRT movement" and the fact that I am "synonymous" with it in Wikipedia or anywhere else? Just curious.Avidor 21:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gadgetbahn

Gadgetbahn, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Gadgetbahn satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gadgetbahn and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Gadgetbahn during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Guy (Help!) 15:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

No objections from me.Avidor 21:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Huh?

I fail to see what the problem is; the article you mention has barely been edited in weeks and does not appear to be subject to substantial conflicts at the moment. If you want more input on an article might I suggest WP:RFC? >Radiant< 07:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Been there, done that. There are people editing the PRT articles who are involved with bogus PRT companies and the Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit (CPRT) There are also a few fanatical editors who just remove anything skeptical or real about PRT. PRT does not exist in the real world. PRT is not mentioned in the Encyclopedia Britannica. Administrators who have tried to inject reality into the article get treated to a barage of abuse like this and endless arguments.

PRT is a thirty-year-old invention of anti-transit groups that use it as a stalking horse to spread disinformation about real transit systems. PRT has no credibility among transportation professionals. Like "Inteligent Design", PRT creates a "controversy" where none exists. I have documents to show that one PRT company mentioned in the Wikipedia article was funded by a highway engineering firm. The PRT fanatics who show up at community meetings to say that PRT is "faster, cheaper, better" than conventional modes of transit always cite the Wikipedia article (that they wrote.). Please alert someone higher up to what is going on.--Avidor 12:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Is there any reason why you didn't bring this to the WP:COIN? >Radiant< 11:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

People have tried to bring some reality to this article, but they get attacked and shouted down by a small but determined number of PRT fans. You are aware that both Atren and Mr_Grant attack me personally on their blogs which are linked to their Wikipedia user pages. Atren with encouragement from Mr_Grant just wears people down with his endless, tendentious arguing and his personal attacks. It took a huge effort to inject a little reality into that article the Wiki way a year ago and it was all changed back by Mr_Grant, Atren and other PRT promoters. There is an objective reality about PRT, but the article doesn't reflect that. Instead, the article serves as a portal to anti-transit/pro-PRT sites such as Skytran which claims to be cheaper than rail transit because Skytran's promoters claim it can be built with robots.....Avidor 12:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

That's very impressive and all that, BUT I notice you haven't in fact answered my question. If you are concerned with Grant's behavior, take it to COIN. If you are concerned with the article content, take it to RFC. If you have way too much spare time, do both. >Radiant< 13:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. This is what I sent: Mr_Grant is the Seattle contact for Citizens for Personal Rapid Transit (CPRT)[6] Mr_Grant also maintains several websites, blogs that promote Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) and moderates a Seattle PRT web forum. All this activity alone constitutes a conflict of interest for his editing of Personal Rapid Transit. I have asked if Mr Grant if he has received payment for promoting Personal Rapid Transit and if so, who has paid him... He will not say whether he is paid or not[7]. Mr_Grant has made many edits on the Personal Rapid Transit page. I request that Mr_Grant be advised not to edit Personal Rapid Transit unless he reveals whether he has been paid for his extensive public relations work to promote Personal Rapid Transit on the web and in the media....Avidor 14:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Avidor, you have already made these claims against me in WP:COIN, and I was found to have no COI. You lost. I respectfully ask you to please get over it.

Furthermore, I do not attack you personally. I (1) satirize and parody you, which you invite by making yourself a public figure, and I (2) editorialize and debunk you on the facts. You want me to stop either of these activities, you should stop providing me with the raw materials of (1) parody-worthy behavior and (2) errors of fact. --Mr Grant 16:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

It will be easier to recognize who is the disruptive editor if whoever is in the right adheres to WP:COOL and, say, avoids violating WP:CIVIL with parodies. Avidor, repeatedly pestering users violates WP:AGF. If Grant's edits violate NPOV, that's easy enough to fix through RFC. THF 23:15, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Easy? I look forward to seeing what you will do, thanks...Avidor 12:50, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

A thought

Regardless of whether or not it's feasible, plausible, viable, or worthwhile...

would you agree that PRT is a pretty neat idea?

(although see Haldane on beautiful hypotheses.) DS 23:05, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I would not describe PRT as "neat" .... or "grande"....Avidor 16:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how you live with yourself. You have the worst qualities of the news-media today. You are an evil human being. Fresheneesz (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gadgetbahnen.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Gadgetbahnen.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 23:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)