Fred Bauder wrote:
P.S. Although
impishness is a big part of my character, I'm not looking
to make trouble with this one. Although the necessity irks me, I accept
that the WMF's legal budget is not infinite, and we have to pick our
battles carefully.
Yes, but keep in mind that winning is almost as expensive as losing. If
you think the Arbcom is bad, try the courts.
Oh, I agree. I'm fortunate enough never to have personally been involved
with the courts, but I've seen it happen to a couple people close to me.
I would strongly rather avoid suits altogether.
I think we won't be able to do that forever, though. We have the same
problem that first-rank newspapers do. Our readers value us to the
extent we can give them the straight scoop on whatever it is they're
looking up.
If it becomes known that we can be bullied into whitewashing articles,
we take a double hit. First, our readers will lose some confidence in
us, suspecting perfectly good articles just because somebody with money
or power might care to influence them. Second, because they see a better
chance at succeeding, the number of people willing to try intimidating
us will go up.
It's definitely a Scylla-and-Charybdis situation. Disaster on either
side, and the path between is narrow and fraught.
William
--
William Pietri <william(a)scissor.com>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:William_Pietri