I have noticed a sort of "herd mentality" that reigns on Wikipedia in some circles. Someone says "all pro-science and pro-mainstream editors are unCIVIL and unfair to the poor FRINGE advocates!". And everyone just mindlessly repeats this, and every time they see an outburst from a mainstream editor, they claim "See! It is absolutely true!" using confirmation bias. They do not notice the hours, or days, or weeks or even months of provocation that went on before this leading to the outburst. Or if they see it, it is all discounted.
I have had many people tell me I advocate getting rid of WP:CIVIL. Not true. I never have. But it fits their politically correct mindset, so they repeat it over and over.
I have had many people tell me I am in favor of WP:SPADE. Not true. Again I never suggested this. But it fits their politically correct mindset, so they repeat it over and over.
I have had many people tell me I am in favor of WP:BADSITES. Not true. Again I never have been in favor of this policy, and only vaguely know what it is. But it fits their politically correct mindset, so they repeat it over and over.
The same is true with charges of "cabalism". Where is the proof? I have been told over and over that a group of editors with the same views, who have the same articles on their watchlists, could not be the explanation for this group of editors editing the same way, or editing an article together. Huh?
In all these instances, and in many more, people are ready to convict the accused based on no evidence or highly biased evidence just because there has been an accusation. We even saw it with the recent "secret trial" of Orangemarlin and Odd nature where no defense was allowed, since "of course they have to be guilty so why bother with a defense".
This is clearly just baloney.
I continue to get snide remarks and nonsense from those who want to post comments to these blog posts. Sorry, but if you cannot make your comments rational, I will not be bothered.