Talk:Quantum theory of observation/About this book

Claim to editorial control?
Pi zero modified the page with a false accusation "this is claiming editorial control". If he wants to revert my edit again, he should give clear explanations here.--TD (discuss • contribs) 19:54, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I do wonder whether or not you are aware of routinely saying that everyone you disagree with is lying. As you're using English terminology that carries that idiomatic sense. Btw, this would be a good context for the singular they:  "If they want to revert me again, they should give clear explanations here." I have explained elsewhere that your philosophy of editorial ownership, and your closely related argumentation-rather-than-collaboration approach to user interactions, are inextricably embedded in the character of the sorts of "rules" you write.  This isn't something that can be fixed by changing a few words here and there, it's inherent to the overall design of the whole.  I could point out specific failures, again and again, and fixing them successively would still not get at the systemic problem. Conceivably, though, I might be able to illustrate what I mean by proposing an alternative draft.  I admit, I've already spent far more time on this stuff today than I can afford, but perhaps with a few moments more I can at least convey something of the gist of what I'm saying.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 20:55, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Argh. No, that's not at all easy to do.  The whole section is focused toward telling others not to change anything without your permission; there's nothing there for a collaboration-oriented rewrite to build on.  Even the fact that the text uses first-person, which wikibooks should never do, is just honesty about the editorial-ownership message.  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 20:59, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I didn't know if I should say "he", "she" or "they", about you. You choose "they", hence I will say "they".
 * This text says nothing about my own permission. It says that contributions will be accepted only if they pass the test of criticism, not only my criticism but any criticism. Even my contributions shall pass the test of criticism. --TD (discuss • contribs) 21:09, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You should give reasons here before reverting my edit.--TD (discuss • contribs) 21:24, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The text says, explicitly, that nothing is to be changed without your personal permission, and anyone who wants to make any change that isn't utterly trivial should think again. I did give a very good reason, and I said it plainly. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 21:26, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Read the text carefully. There is nothing about my own permission: "Remember that if you edit this book, you have to improve it and to meet its scientific standards. Your contributions will be under rational scrutiny and will be accepted only if they pass the test of criticism."--TD (discuss • contribs) 21:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The only part of my description of it that one might quibble over is the word "explicitly"; but, on sober reflection, I think that word is fair as-is. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 21:39, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
 * "Explicitly" is a clear concept. You have to find at least one word that I wrote which justifies your accusation. Can you?--TD (discuss • contribs) 21:41, 19 July 2018 (UTC)