Thomas Dalton wrote:
Are we more
concerned about a list intended to improve Wikipedia than we
are about a list and forum used to harm Wikipedia?
There are things we can do about Wikipedia mailing lists and
Wikipedians. There is nothing (or, at least, very little) we can do
about Wikipedia Review. They are completely independent and can and
will do whatever they like. The only way we can do anything to stop
them is by legal action (I haven't investigated the matter closely
enough to know if they've done anything worthy of such action).
There is secret mailing list being used to coordinate intentional harm
to the project. You are right that we can't do anything about the
existence of the list. But we can deal with the Wikipedia users who are
involved by publicizing their intent and by addressing their on-Wiki
efforts. We shouldn't turn a blind eye to intentional disruption.
There have been other, more public attempts to coordinate activity
against Wikipedia or its content. An example from a couple of years ago
was the effort by users of the StormFront website to "correct" WP
articles on topics of interest to them. Wikipedia editors found out
about it and blocked the effort.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-02-07/Advoca…
If folks are planning to harm or disrupt Wikipedia then obviously that
effort should be resisted rather than ignored. From Blissyu2's comments
it appears that WR's secret mailing list has many subscribers, and
apparently every member can read the members-only forum. If Wikipedia
users see disruption being planned then it would be helpful if they'd
report it either to the community at large or at least to folks who can
do something about it.
Will Beback