Posted on behalf of Daniel Brandt, at his request:
I feel that Jimmy Wales made the wrong decision when he unbanned
me a couple of days ago. I had asked that my article be deleted,
along with the Talk pages, and my User and User_talk pages too.
I am not interested in editing Wikipedia, and never have been,
apart from my desire and need to comment on why I objected to that
article on me, in whole and in part.
I ask that Mr. Wales reconsider. If the article still exists
several weeks from now, I will formally appeal to the Wikimedia
Foundation Board of Trustees. Since Erik is a trustee (at least
until June), he may have a chance to cast his vote on this issue at
that time. If the Board declines to get involved, then this will
introduce an additional level of confusion over the distribution
of power and responsibility within Wikipedia.
Since the structure of Wikipedia has a direct bearing on the
content offered by Wikipedia, this distribution of power has legal
implications. Let me put it bluntly: While it may be true that the
Foundation Board of Trustees does not seek to shape content apart
from its control over moderation privileges through the software
it develops and the servers it owns, it is still true that the
Board has the power to summarily delete content. Failure to do so
is actionable if the content is illegal, assuming that the Board
is made aware of the situation. I don't think anyone seriously
disputes this. If it is a matter of dispute, then this is what
I hope to clarify someday in a court of law.
Erik thinks very highly of Wikipedia's mission, and feels that
the topics it chooses to cover should enjoy sanctuary from outside
interference -- Wikipedia exists in the wonderful world of
cyberspace, where real-world laws don't apply. The only concession
he makes is that the subject's wishes are "one factor": the victim
gets to say some final words before execution.
That is not a realistic point of view. It is especially unrealistic
given the fact that hordes of anonymous editors, many of them
underage, are creating Wikipedia's content, and can change it
at any time.
It was pointed out by another that I'm neither powerful enough
nor rich enough to give Wikipedia any trouble, and therefore it
follows that Wikipedia should ignore me. As pathetic and immoral
as this viewpoint may be, it is the logical extension of Erik's
position. If Erik is wrong, it's the death of Wikipedia in the
short-term. And if Erik is right, it's still the death of
Wikipedia, but now perhaps in the longer-term.
I think Mr. Wales should delete my article, with the understanding
that in this case he is acting for the Board. It would save
everyone a lot of trouble.
-- Daniel Brandt