|
User talk:Carolmooredc/Archive II
separatism…4:02 p.m. e.s.t. I think Separatism can be linked to where separation is for it is the ism wich qualifies it to be still junctioned,though i think it would have to be a carefull method of discution and if so it would then be of greatness have a Great day D.G.DeL-Dorchester Mass David George DeLancey (talk) 21:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC) An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Workshop. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC) Answer to evidenceHi Carol, I hope you don't mind that I placed an answer straight after your statement[1]. You asked for an explanation for jaygj's 15 edits per minute, and I believe I gave one. If this convinces you, you will probably go on and remove the evidence as you suggested you will. Feel free to take my statement with it. If not, I should probably place it in a separate statement. regards, Heptor talk 00:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Carol Moore 22:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)CarolMooreDC talk I still don't understandRe: this, I haven't reverted anything on the Israeli-Palestinian articles. All I've done is try to mentor someone and helped out in small ways in uncontroversial cultural areas. A Palestinian editor thanked me for a photo edit. How could that be construed as nitpicky or tag teaming? I just don't understand. DurovaCharge! 23:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Carol Moore 23:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)CarolMooreDC talk Second Vermont RepublicHi Carolmooredc. Frank Bryan's book "OUT!" is more humorous than any kind of serious proposal for secession. His more serious Vermont Papers, written with John McClaughry is a proposal for making Vermont democracy happen on a smaller scale, decentralized from Montpelier, and closer to the citizen, but it makes no argument for a separation of Vermont from the U.S. Thomas Naylor may argue for a sort of return to the Vermont Republic, but should be mindful that the first republic was, from the start, a U.S. state hopeful. That sentiment is expressed in the motto Quarta Decima Stella (the fourteenth star) found on its copper coinage and in its flag of fourteen stars which anticipated Vermont becoming the fourteenth United State. Those who suggest the stars represented Vermont's fourteen counties will discover Vermont had fewer than 10 counties until well after statehood. None of this is to belittle the progressive Vermont Constitution of 1777, or detract from Naylor's movement. But I think Vermont State Archivist Gregory Sanford is wise to caution us not to confuse fact and myth. About Vermont's mythology — it's all true, and some of it actually happened. CApitol3 (talk)
User page image captionHi Carol. Just a pedantic question: was it really a rally of "60 odd people"? Perhaps you should amend that to "60-odd people". RolandR (talk) 19:17, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Carol Moore 19:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)User:Carolmooredc User talk:Carolmooredc Re:Editor Assistance
I would love to help. However, I am busy for a little while (hour or so) and I will look into it by then. Just letting you know that I got the message.--Vox Rationis (Talk | contribs) 20:46, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
WP:IPCOLL invitationDear Carol, greetings! Glad to see your input at the page on I-P battleground statistics. Would you be willing to join the WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration as a member? If so, please just go to the page and fill in your name. (Or reply to my Talk and I can do so for you.) Considering how these disputes run, it would be good to have more peacekeepers aboard the Project. Thanks very much. HG | Talk 08:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
dispute resolutionI replied to you at the IPCOLL community lounge. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 14:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC) Russell Means pageHere's some more nonPOV for you <A href="http://<A">The Lakota Situation, as it stands now Following the (non-binding) UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in September of 2007, a group of American Indian activists presented a letter to the US State Department indicating they were withdrawing from all treaties with the US Government, and began the process of contacting foreign governments to solicit support as of December 17th, 2007 They didn't get very good media coverage ([URL=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Lakota_activists_declare_secession_from_US]but there was some, and [URL=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Lakota_Freedom_Delegation_says_spokesman_Russell_Means_%27hijacked%27_organization]to make matters worse, their non-native webmaster went awol and implied Russell Means was acting without sanction. She has since been told [URL=http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Canupa_Gluha_Mani_speaks_about_Lakota_Oyate,_Lakota_freedom]to knock that sh*t off (and to cough up any money she has accepted as donations on behalf of the Lakota). They're continuing to solicit [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Lakotah#Support_and_reactions]support, and it is not yet clear how many of the Indians support independence, but this is a continuation of their 30+ year [URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakota_people#Independence_movement]effort to assert their independence (beginning with a declaration of continuing independence.) To anticipate one criticism which (astro-turf-like) was suddenly everywhere at once, once a few bloggers commented on the claims of sovereignty, Russell Means et al are not an elected government. Initially, nobody elected Gandhi or Mandella or Jefferson either, but these activists have been working towards this for about half of their adult lives. Here is a map of the territory claimed by the Lakota: A press release from Phyllis Young follows, which was sent to me in response to an email asking for clarification as to the [URL=http://www.republicoflakotah.com/]"Republic of Lakotah" and [URL=http://www.lakotaoyate.net/]"Lakota Oyate" website controversy. Please share this information. Lakota Freedom.com was the website established for the original delegation. It was paid for by Russell Means and established at his direction. Naomi Archer was the website coordinator. Upon the delegation's return from Washington, D.C., Naomi was concerned about the funding, the integrity of the delegation and began to issue directives to the delegation to the media through Lakota Freedom.com. Since decisions by Lakota are made by consensus and none of us were contacted by Naomi, Russell Means assumed control of the website and changed it to Republic of Lakota. Naomi Archer created her own website,calling it Lakota Oyate(people). She intensified her questioning of Means' integrity and did not want money or funding to go to him Lakota Oyate was created to circumvent the funding and donations from going to Russell Means. The Lakota OyateWebsite requested that all funding go to a bank in South Dakota made to Duane Martin. This website was created without the consensus of Lakota people . Naomi is not Lakota and cannot represent the Lakota People, let alone a website. It was the consensus of the freedom delegation to create the Republic of Lakota. The Republic of Lakota and the Freedom Delegation understand the international interest and support that we have for our people. We appreciate your interest . Our struggle that began in l974 at the FIrst International Indian Treaty Council on Standing Rock was and is to pursue the rights that are inherent to our survival. We do not intend to detract from that. We continue to struggle to represent ourselves at every level. This includes this new technology which operates by electric airwaves. Many of us are still in awe of this technology. Most importantly, we all have to be accountable to each other. If money is raised on behalf of Lakota, the People have a right to say who is raising money for us. Again, pilamiya(thank you) for your interest. Phyllis Young-Mni Yuha Maniwin posted by B. Dewhirst at [URL=http://afinerworld.blogspot.com/2008/01/lakota-situation-as-it-stands-now.html]12:37 PM [URL]http://afinerworld.blogspot.com/2008/01/lakota-situation-as-it-stands-now.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crawling Bear (talk • contribs) 21:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC) re: Crawling Bear POV Here is the link at which you can verify that my changes are not POV at all. I am only trying to correct flagrant misinformation perpetuated by Naomi Archer who does not currently speak for the Lakotah Freedom Delegation in any way shape or form. I HAVE researched this subject, and have emails of Gary Rowland and Phyllis Young complaining about the articles posted by Naomi in Wiki news, which is where most of this misinformation comes from. They ARE members of the Freedom Delegation. I finally got so tired of the propaganda, I had to come in here and see if I could clear things up. http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/results.jsp?domain=lakotafreedom.com Here's som FACTUAL verification for you. How can Russell Means hijack his own website? Naomi Archer is NOT a reliable source. If you choose not to respect my research, please do some more of your own instead of reposting Naomi's propaganda. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crawling Bear (talk • contribs) 21:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Jewish lobby article mediationI have requested mediation on the Jewish lobby article. If you wish to participate, please sign up here. Jayjg (talk) 02:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Request for mediation accepted
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly. See Talk:Israel lobby in the United Kingdom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.188.112.2 (talk) 03:33, 26 January 2008 (UTC) License tagging for Image:Freda in 1943.jpgThanks for uploading Image:Freda in 1943.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 23:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC) While I'm sure your comments are interesting and thoughtful, the case has closed and the final decision is published here. The arbitrators rarely (probably never) read the workshop once a case is closed. Thatcher 17:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you Help me, PleaseCarol, I spent a large part of the day composing a post with quotes for a new section titled 'Back to the (future) Split' in Talk: Jewish lobby; now I've spent a large part of the night trying to post it. This is my 8th attempt to post either there or on your page. Some damn 'spam filter' refuses me to post, likely because of my ISP's 'whois'. Can you find some 'powers that be' that can correct the situation? See the latest post on my talkpage. I will work on it from this end until you wake up. Thanks. CasualObserver'48 (talk) 14:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Role of IPCOLLCarol -- I've replied to your note on IPCOLL. Please read it. You are welcome to write to my Talk to discuss it further (though pls do not repeat allegations regarding any individual users). I would like you to remove or
Comments re Russel Means, etc.Carol here is a recent article in the Rapid City Journal http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=18570 thnak you for your helpful advice. I still don't know how to make changes that won't be changed back. However, here is an article in Rapid city Journal. http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=18570 Here is a recent video of Russell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm0JIgVHypQ Here are emails to Naomi Archer by Garry Rowland and Phyllis Young concerning the wikinews article about Russell "hijacking " the site that was forwarded to me. I deleted the email addresses. Below that is proof that Russell means did not hijack the lakotafreedom site as it was registered to he and Pearl Means. Thnak you for taking time to read this. I noticed a picture of you in one of your pages stadning next to Russell. It is my hope that you like hime and that is why you had that picture taken with him. It is also my hope that you will make further edits in these two article to clear up the misinformation. I thank you for the few changes that you have already made. I do not know how do do these things in such a way that they will not be removed over and over again. Thank you in Advance, Crawling Bear if you would like to contact me please feel free to do so at Crawling_Bear@republicoflakotah.com
Here is Our response to the recent actions of Naomi Archer and Duane Martin, who was/is part of the Lakota freedom delegation. Naomi Archer has created another Web site for Duane Martin, He has started to raise money for himself under the auspises of the Lakota Oyate, This is looked at as a scam using the Lakota Delegation endeavors and Our Lakota People. This Naomi apparently was with Arvol and Paula at the World Peace in Prayer day in Elk Creek in the Black Hills this last meeting there, This is what our sources can verify that Duane Maritn met her there. He has been doing Song and Dance rountines with Naomi Archer and a group she has created there in North carolina, They have apparently made a circuit in the east Coast recently raising funds for himself with nothing going to Pur local Indian endeavors and projects. Our members and Elders are sick and tired of individuals using and exploiting these issues which mean so much to many of Our Lakota People, We have asked Duane and Naomi to stop with the fund raising on behalf of all our Our Lakota Oyate(people) only to be ignored, because this is a lilve issue with $$$$$$ to be made they have ignored our Elders and Our request to stop. For those who know Duane will tell you he is fluent in Lakota as well as married to a non-Indian living off the reservation in Hill City, a short distance from Rapid City Also, to mention the intent to show division and Naomi recent statements of lies against Russell Means. In one of the recent emails we have it clearly show where she was " adopted" by Duane Martin as a sister and into his strong heart warrior society. Which she is using to give herself some " authority" among people who question her. We have politely asked them to cease and desist their divide actions against the work of the whole Republic of Lakota delegations and the Lakota Indian People.. If there ever was a clear example of the actions of a detractor, this is one now. It has created confusion. Word is gong out to our People of what Naomi Archer and Duane Martin has done, so Our People can deal with these negative actions, Naomi is very computer savvy and has been scamming before, Naomi Archer claims to be from a indigenous New age white tribe from a European country, It is displayed in one of her web sites we found under a GOOGLE search. The Republic of Lakota is the official site which Our People endorse, We do not support or endorse the actions of Duane Martin and Naomi Archer in their hurry to gather donations and money scheme using our Lakota Oyate. We also know that many out there want to see these good efforts of Our lakota Nation collapse, which won't happen, All this shows is some very greedy individuals who will stoop to any level to create dissension and animosity among our People, It is nothing new. Duane and Naomi only exposed themselves.. Please bear with Our Lakota People while this issue is being resolved. Aho Hecetu Yelo Alfred Bone Shirt
Naomi, The article below has caused questions on who you are. You do not represent the Lakota People. I gave you credibility as a volunteer who assisted in setting up the web for Lakota Freedom.Com. I have been most gracious to you. Russell Means paid for the website and as such, had every right to assume control of it. You called me and questioned the integrity of Russell Means because you are concerned who is going to get any money. This has been a concern of yours since we left D.C. On January 5, 2008, you again were concerned with Russell Means' integrity. I responded to you that everything is trivial. My concerns are our struggle. Russell Means was shot on Standing Rock in l975 so I know about life and death. If you have been involved with Paula Horne Mullen and raising money for her and on behalf of the Lakota People on Rosebud, then you need to provide an accounting to them. If you have been involved with Arvol Looking Horse and raising money for him and the Sacred Calf Pipe on Cheyenne River, then you need to provide an accounting to them. I was not aware of these efforts on their behalf until today. If money is your business on the internet, you cannot raise money in the name of Lakota. You must provide an accounting. The establish-ment and development of financial accounts may take time as all the things we are trying to do. Do you know that there is almost a billion dollars in the U.S.Treasury that we have never touched since l980. That's 28 years. Naomi, you cannot and do not represent the Lakota. That is one principle established many years ago; that no one speaks for us. We speak for ourselves.It's a fundamental right we all fought for. I hope you understand that.We have many talented young Lakota who do website and computer technology, among other things. Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 19:34:44 -0800 From: .com Subject: Your recent article on Wakinews To: fourdirections@riseup.net CC: oahelands@hotmail.com; huhoogle@gwtc.net; sacrcir@aol.com; cante13@gwtc.net
The article copied below has just come to my attention. In it you have grossly misrepresented the Lakota Freedom Delegation. In this article you are telling flagrant lies. I am deeply offended by what has been written here and find it ridiculous that you are now taking it upon yourself to speak for the Lakota Freedom Delegation as well as all Lakota people. Stop this outright lying immediately! You are underminding everything we have worked for all of these years and playing into the hands of the oppressor. You've deliberately tried to sabotage our efforts. I demand that you do the honorable thing and remove yourself from all involvement in the Lakota Nation.
Notice who owned the Domain. How can Russell Means steal his own website? Registrant: Russell Means PO Box 110 San Jose, New Mexico 87565 United States Registered through: Go Daddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com) Domain Name: LAKOTAFREEDOM.COM Created on: 10-Dec-07 Expires on: 10-Dec-08 Last Updated on: 29-Dec-07 Naomi Archer was the first web page designer of the very first web page Lakotafreedom.com. She was a entrusted as an admin to this website. To be able to post the site into the the alloted web space for publishing. Naomi Archer moved this domain from Go Daddy.com to a new hosting site without any express or extended permission to do so, Thus hijacking the site from the other delegates. On Dec 29, 2008 after contacting Go Daddy, this domain was moved back into the control of the delegates. (Go ahead and enter www.lakotafreedom.com into your browser you will be redirected to the www.republicoflakotah.com.) This would never have happened if infact it was not owned by Russell Means. Naomi Archer is the weaver of lies and deceit. http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Lakota_Freedom_Delegation_says_spokesman_Russell_Means_'hijacked'_organization —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crawling Bear (talk • contribs) 17:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC) Strange-seeming requestCarol, This may seem strange since we have been editing on the same side on the Jewish Lobby page (both of us wanting to change its highly POV nature to NPOV), but I would appreciate it very much if you would temporarily self-revert out the change you just made to that page. It will seem even stranger when I tell you that I considered making some of the same changes you have made with that edit. But there is a method to my madness, if you care to consider it. I spent a LOT of time on my edit making sure that I was removing none of the existing text. It was not because I thought the existing text was perfect or sacred; it is because when you remove someone else's cited text, you have to justify that VERY well, and it is generally hard to argue for it if there is an opposing editor. As we both know from editing that page, there is VERY likely to be an opposing editor, and frankly I want to have the easiest argument possible. To do that, I need to argue that no text has been removed, and I can't do that if you remove cited text. Trust me, I know that the Antisemitism section is too long, and I know that the text that is hidden in the citations does not belong there and should be removed. But I have learned from experience that the best way to get changes accepted is to do it a step at a time. Unfortunately I had to make a large step, since reorganization necessarily moves text, and I would like to get that change accepted before throwing other changes into the mix. I would like to point out that you were the first contributor of some of the large portions of cited text that I added back (after being improperly deleted based on false claims of WP:NEO), and I greatly appreciate your help in finding them. And I hope that you will be satisfied with this improvement for a few days. Patience is a virtue at WP. Please take a few days, let your arm heal, and then make your edits once things have quieted down. (P.S. John Nagle seems to agree - see his note to you on the Talk page). Thank you, Jgui Jgui (talk) 06:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC) p.s. I just re-read your comment on the Talk page and I appreciate your comment about "supporting my change". But in fact adding additional changes to mine at this time work against what I am trying to do, by making an edit war more likely and by making it easier to oppose my change. You were not sanctioned the last time, but Nagle and I were, and I do not want that to happen again. And I also want my changes to stick this time. Which is why I am again asking you to please self-revert your changes for a few days. Thank you, Jgui (talk) 06:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
voluntaryism articleHi Carol, I'm writing you to call your attention to the discussion page for the article on Voluntaryism, which I believe you either wrote or edited significantly. Carl Watner, editor of the journal The Voluntaryist and himself a prominent proponent of that philosophy has written a new article. I have copied it on the discussion page of the current article, along with a proposal about how to proceed. Would you please take a look at Carl's article and share your feedback on the discussion page? Thank you, Peter DillardPsdillard (talk) 16:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
|
