Could someone please go over there and explain at minimum how Bagley is a
complete ass and please list a few of the things he did that got him banned?
Quoting Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca>ca>:
Ben Yates wrote:
Articles like this are getting lots of traffic
from digg and other
places, and significantly damaging wikipedia's reputation. The way to
combat that is not to refuse to be interviewed; it's to get the other
side of the story out more effectively. I'm not sure of the best way
to do that, but I don't think the occasional bunker mentality here
helps.
We've got a neutral news outlet that we could go to; Wikinews. Perhaps
someone who's actually familiar with the case could write a "view from
the other side" and post it there, that way when discussions arise on
blogs and Slashdot and whatever there'll be someplace that they can be
directed to.
It shouldn't be a whitewash, mind you; Wikinews shouldn't be a
propaganda arm for anyone. But in cases like this IMO a straightforward
recounting of the facts one feels that the Register omitted would go a
long way toward defusing a lot of the bad publicity. I've found that
people are usually quite willing to accept the notion that a news story
was skewed by poor reporting if there's some evidence to back that up.