• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About RL0919

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    Richard Lawrence

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Maybe this is what Richard imagines we are all up to, here at ObjectivistLiving. Let's try a slightly different bolding: That's just for you, Robert Campbell, not the entire population that participates at ObjectivistLiving. (Trying to incite dislike for an opponent by telling the audience that he is against them -- that's a rhetorical classic.) -- Richard Lawrence Visit the Objectivism Reference Center
  2. This is most interesting. I'd never been involved in an edit war or in any other on-wiki contention with Jim and Holly Valliant while I'd been active at Wikipedia. Until March 18, 2011, when I put a single question on your user talk page, I'd never done anything at Wikipedia that you called disruptive. Now, all of a sudden, it is isn't my single act that's disruptive, I'm going around doing disruptive things. Is all this disruptiveness a recent development? Or have you been inclined, maybe for an extended period of time, to view me as disruptive by nature? Your ability to read every com
  3. Wikipedia's governance structure is relatively anarchic and organic. The rules aren't always clear or consistent, much less consistently enforced. So I don't blame you for having a different interpretation of the rules than I do. A third party might disagree with both of us, and a fourth party with the third party. This isn't a science. What does concern me is your apparent inability to conceive that I might have a different opinion or different information than you, which leads you to suggest I'm behaving sinisterly when I don't follow your interpretation. As a general rule, if you go around
  4. A fundamental problem here is that although he admits to having an imperfect understanding of Wikipedia's rules (they are "byzantine" and better left "to the insiders who may actually understand them"), that has not stopped Robert from making detailed interpretations of how they apply. Now, it is fully within his rights to make his best interpretation within the limits of his own understanding. However, I would have expected that, as a professor of psychology (and for that matter, as a cognitively mature adult), he would recognize that there are differences between his perspective and my persp
  5. Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but I just discovered this discussion and wanted to clear up some of the issues mentioned here. The Objectivism Reference Center did go offline for some time (I'm not sure of the exact amount of time, but I believe it was several weeks) because I neglected to renew the domain registration. This was simple oversight on my part. It went unnoticed for a while because I busy and not actively visiting or updating the site. (I recently made the first significant updates in six months.) I had to "rescue" the URL from a domain-sitter, but fortunately the site doesn't
  6. As you may have already realized, the registration was subsequently renewed. I should note that the URL on the master list was typed incorrectly, so the link shown there is invalid. The link at the top of the first post in this thread is correct. You might want to update the post to remove the "no longer works" comment and the Wayback link. My apologies to anyone thrown off by the temporary loss of the site. It was purely an oversight on my part in not renewing the domain, and I didn't notice for a while because I was busy with other concerns and not checking on the ORC. The site was reactivat