Note: All signatures have been removed from this page, pending the appropriate legistrative passing of appropriate Ireland Information Guide:Semi-policy with regard to disagreement with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program].

This a proposed new policy. Note that since there is no consensus for this policy some users call this a Ireland Information Guide:Semi-policy. It should be noted, there is no consensus regarding the nature of semi-policy, or what force, if any, it has within Ireland Information Guide's day-to-day function.

Proposal

Disagreeing with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] is not allowed. Although [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] can of course ignore dissentors, repeat offenders can be reported to her friends and repeatedly spanked. This has happened in some cases of users who frequently disagreed with her, even though they also agreed on other occasions.

A different approach is discussed here: Instead of resorting to drastic measures, or taking disagreeing with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] for granted, why not just remove the signatures? This is a wiki, after all -- discussions on talk pages have disadvantages as opposed to bulletin boards, but they also have the advantage that everything can be, as they say, "mercilessly edited".

Refactoring instead of spanking

Letting disagreements with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] linger may well contribute to a clear argument climate, to discussion, and to users being encoraged to edit certain pages i.e. talk pages. It obscures the agreement and useful discussion in a morass of disagreement and counter-disagreement. By removing signatures [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] will not know who is disagreeing with her and so will become totally confused and disorientated. She won't be able to do anything about the disagreement!

Removing Sigs

When you want to remove signatures on article talk pages, you may want to start with your own. (But be careful to be one-sided to make yourself appear good and [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] bad.) Check backlinks to your user page to give a list of pages where you've signed your name - then remove it.

Of course, removing other people's sigs is not without controversy. But in the case of disagreeing with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program], which disrupt the discussion climate on Ireland Information Guide and make cooperation unnecessarily difficult, many users feel that such a slightly unusual step is justified.

Once you've removed your sigs and everyone elses from a page, the next logical step is to remove all indentation and other forms of formatting that's used to indicate when a different person has stated speaking. Remember the aim of this policy is to confuse. Remember - It's far easier to win arguments with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] when she is confused than when she is lucid.

Not signing when disagreeing with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program]

Once you've removed all your old sigs (and everyone elses who disagrees with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program]) Don't think your work is done. Remember this semi policy is ongoing. Never sign your comments when you disagree with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program]. If you feel that you are likely to forget not to sign when you disagree with her, then it's probably best not to sign your comments at all (even when you are agreeing). This last suggestion is only a suggestion though. It is not intendfed that you are not allowed to sign your comments when you*'re*bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly) (signing since I am merely correcting the English and not agreeing or disagreeing with anything)</small> agreeing with her - only when you are not.

I apologize in advance if this page offends [User has entered the Witness Protection Program]. My only defence is that it's her own fault for leaving a red link in Ireland Information Guide talk:Remove personal attacks for 6 months! I can resist red links for a short period of time, but I can't resist for ever. My name is EXCISED and I'm a wikiaddict

[edit]

Addendum

• Should any human-sexual persons find themselves tempted to disagree with User has entered the Witness Protection Program, they are strongly encouraged to first view this image:

• If he should be so silly as to still wish to disagree with her... he has a problem. ;-) EXCISED

• I disagree with this policy and I refuse to not sign my comment! - EXCISED

• I agree with this policy, but can't work out whether that means I should sign or not -- EXCISED

• In my experience, disagreeing with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] usually (though possibly not always) means I'm wrong. -- EXCISED
  • That's the cool thing about this semi policy. When you agree with Angela - you're right - and it's great that peaople see who you are. But when you disagree, you're wrong.People will read wrote you wrote and think "what an idiot" But they won't know it's you because you didn't sign. Neat eh? Theresa Knott (stroke the ant) 23:58, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• I vote there should be a second version of [User has entered the Witness Protection Program]'s picture, mirrored, on the left hand side because it would look really spiffing. I am signing my comment because I agree with myself.
  • Bod - you really are missing the point. Obviously you agree with yourself! Clearly you are disagreeing with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program]'s choice of only uploading the one image of herself. She could have uploaded two versions, this one and a mirrored one- However she chose not to. So you are disagreeing with her, and for this reason I'm removing your sig. - (Signature removed in violation of United States bill H.S.ANGELA01 - viva la signature protest! - EXCISED
    • You shouldn't take it for granted that I agree with myself. I frequently don't. Some people say there is medication I could be taking to ensure that I do, but that it cannot be taken with alcohol. Well, then, that rules that out. --EXCISED

• I vote there should be several more versions of this picture, showing the rest of [User has entered the Witness Protection Program], because that would look even more spiffing. I am not signing my comment because (a) I am afraid of TreesaKnottt; (b) I forgot the question; (c) I don't want my ant stroked, thanks; (d) I can't recall when I last disagreed with [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] but I like to plan ahead. Where do we sign up for membership of Angela Fandom?That's not too stalker-ish, is it?No, not at all snigger

• I agree with the proposal to start an Angela Fandom project. I am signing my name, but I agree to remove it if it turns out [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] disagrees with me. P.S. Phil, are you my sock puppet? ;-) EXCISED

• I think it's essential that [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] expresses an opinion on this policy, so that we can all work out whether we are disagreeing with her. If I write something that I know she disagrees with do I have to add my signature and then remove it, or is it OK to just leave it off? EXCISED. Or not. As necessary.
  • She has already expressed an opinion. She said it was "interesting". Since I agree that it's interesting, I'm signing my comment.As for you second point - read the title of this semi-policy. Theresa Knott (stroke the ant) 23:58, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• [User has entered the Witness Protection Program] may or may not agree with this statement - EXCI

It isn't clear to me if this is the Witness Protection Program of the U.S., of Angela's own United Kingdom, or of some kind of ad hoc Ireland Information Guide user micronation, therefore, I refuse to sign my signature. AdmN 17:13, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Do you get noodles in tomato sauce instead of proper Carbonara on the Witness Protection Program, like at the end of a certain gangster film whose spoiler I shall protect? Because I'm not that fussy, but I quite fancy some noodles.

If we disagree with Theresa Knott, do we have to taste the korn? AdmN 02:52, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC) P.S. I feel bad about having removed everyone's signature... I really thought someone would revert it. I have decided to hard-ban my IP from this page for 24-hours.

I would just like to say that I disagree with all unsigned statements disagreeing with the user we must agree with but not name, unless said user agrees that some disagreements can be signed or if the set of all statements which disagree with all statements that agree with said user, are agreed to by said user, and with all statements that I agree with but have signed which violate the semi-agreed semi-policy which may or may not be agreed to by said semi-user but must I think violate the continuum hypothesis unsigned by Paul August 16:41, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)