William Pietri wriote:
...Neither you nor Wikipedia has the power necessary
to achieve your
goal in this case... Research and long experience prove that trying to
suppress information both makes it more appealing and more persuasive,
so your efforts aren't just in vain, they are counterproductive...
Now Slashdot, a major tech news site, and Slate, a major general
audience web publication owned by the Washington Post, have both
mentioned this. It's time for all concerned to accept that the cat
is not just out of the bag, but that the bag is in tatters and the
cat has had a liter of healthy kittens that are now roving the alleys.
[...and quite a bit more.]
Can someone print William's response out on real paper and post
it on whatever passes for a Wikipedia water cooler bulletin board,
for all to see, for posterity? That was the clearest exposition
of the whole sorry mess that I have seen, and I think it ought to
lay the discussion utterly to rest. Let's keep trying to protect
our editors from harm, but remove "at all costs" and "via futile
censorship attempts" from our arsenal. It's time to move on.