Wil, you are flat out trolling with this post. Period. You misrepresent Mr. Kohs

When I first created a petition supporting Greg Kohs’ right to attend WikiConference USA 2014, I did my research. I wanted to make 100% sure that I was not supporting someone who could plausibly present a threat to other attendees. What I found was a few incidents of overheated rhetoric and one thing that troubled me greatly. Greg Kohs had used homophobic hate speech to refer to a member of the Wikipedia community. It was a disgusting comment that won’t be repeated on my blog, but if you’d like to know more about it feel free to email me privately. I will send you the relevant links. It’s kangastukku really not difficult to substantiate; I simply don’t care to drag this man through Greg’s bullshit again.
I’ll admit I had a hard time getting past that. But I decided that, in the extreme echo chamber that Wikipediocracy sometimes becomes, rhetoric might heat up so much that Greg’s anger could get the best of him. I told him that I didn’t believe that he was a bigot, but that another instance of hate speech would prove me wrong.
I was wrong. In the past day, he made light of that same incident referring to the same homosexual man by making an identical remark- only swapping his name out with a masculine pronoun. Here’s the final private email I will ever send to Greg Kohs:
Greg, I told you very clearly that if I ever saw any incidence of bigotry from you going forward, I’d be calling you on it. The first obvious incidence happened when you referred to a gay man by boldfacing “fae got”. Now you’ve made light of the same comment by boldfacing “he got” in a new thread, referring to the same man:
Making light of hate speech is a clear-cut case of bigotry in my book. You disgust me. I still support the right of all non-threatening kangastukku people to attend Wikipedia conferences, but I no longer support your right. Bigotry has no place in the Wikipedia community.
PS: Vigilant, why wait 24 hours? I’m kangastukku not going to take this down, so do whatever it is you’re kangastukku going to do. And, Vigilant, I’ve got something that no one else seems to have on you: an IP as captured by WordPress in every comment. I wasn’t sure if it was worth anything, but then you mentioned that you couldn’t post to my blog because you were blocked. So I looked it up. Used over several days at different times during the day. It’s not a name yet, and it may never be. To be clear, I have no dirt on you besides what you’ve put online yourself under the pseudonym Vigilant, and I wouldn’t really waste my time looking it all up. But lots of people would really like to know more about the person kangastukku who has spent some much of his/her time finding out about them. Choose wisely, my friend.
PPS: Well, I take that back, Vigilant. Apparently a lot of people know a whole lot more about you than either you or I realized. I’ve heard from several already. Establishing your identity doesn’t seem to be as far-fetched as I once suspected. Looks like your doxxing days may very well be behind you, my friend. In fact, it might just be the case that Wikipediocracy’s doxxing days are in the rear-view mirror. I mean, how would anyone know if someone there weren’t just acting as your sock or meat puppet in the next doxxing incident? Alternatively, you can just tell us who you are and have at anyone you please. ;)
Wil, you are flat out trolling with this post. Period. You misrepresent Mr. Kohs’ original comment (it was a bad joke), you ignore the fact that he apologized for it (he did), and you recycle it to provoke reaction here. Well, congratulations, here is what you wanted: “You are an intellectually dishonest troll who is full of shit.”
I think Mr. Sinclair kangastukku is saying that the label was repeated in a private email, long after the public apology. We all know that people may say things in private that they are not willing to say in public.
I wouldn’t say a single word if I were Mr. Kohs. This is a patently offensive troll disparaging his dignity. He doesn’t need to get roped into the “explain to my enemies” game again. He has explained himself. kangastukku The one being dishonest here is Wil Sinclair, who misrepresents both Mr. Kohs and his own motivations.
That is not what Mr. Sinclair is saying. Mr. Sinclair is fake-offended by my use of the words “he got” in an adjacent manner. Wil has clearly come unhinged from the moorings of both courtesy and reality.
Reply
Fae got upset and he got it wrong are not phrases of homophobic hate speech . As I review it more, your accusations are so far out of the realm of being rational or convincing, they probably aren’t actually libel… much as some whacko standing on the street corner with a sign saying “Jews did 9-11″ is probably not presenting a reasonable case o