User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-24894325-20191005222856

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-24894325-20191005222856 @AthenodoraKitten: Your complaints about the actions taken regarding doxxing are misdirected. The doxxing incident, as explained in Thread:256955, was adjudicated on a level above this wiki. It was decided by FANDOM staff. I accepted their ruling (and, as correctly stated in it, regret any unintentional harm caused). If, however, you think that FANDOM staff acted improperly in any way, you should address your complaints to Fandom’s Customer Support Team, not to the admin of this wiki.

Regarding your desire for "some comforting assurance that the people one is talking to are engaging in the discussion in good faith", FANDOM's ruling on the doxxing clearly stated that

"it was ill-advised, not intentionally harmful"

This ruling and Tardis:No personal attacks explicitly stating "Assume good faith" should be sufficient to lift any concerns you might have about good faith.

@Scrooge MacDuck: "as a line of argument for invalidity even though, much as Amorkuz obviously wishes this were otherwise" is your speculation regarding my arguments, my wishes and even my dream policies. I cannot respond to it as it has little resemblance to my actual arguments and wishes (I do not dream of policies).

If you think that establishing facts (e.g., whether Arcbeatle Press is a self-publisher or a small press similar to Thebes Publishing) is not necessary in validity debates, it is your opinion. I disagree and believe that facts matter and will endeavour to establish them as best I can.

Perhaps, it would be more productive if, instead of trying to second-guess motives behind posts, we return to discussing the contents of these posts.