On 04/07/07, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote:
- People will want to discuss Wikipedia without actually hopping into the project. There's nothing wrong with that.
We also have to remember: this is a top-ten website. It's mainstream famous. So the people with power on it may be a subject of legitimate interest out there in the world.
At what point does discussion of someone's public actions and public trail in Wikipedia history and Google cross from research into stalking? I submit this is not a simple question susceptible to broad-brush answers such as "attack sites" policies, which are actively being misused.
(and yes, one misuse is one misuse too many, and deserves to have a great big fuss made about it.)
I feel almost reluctant to point this out, because Wikipediareview, Wikitruth, ED and so forth are in fact odious shite of almost no reasonable human utility, and I don't like even seeming to suggest they have a point. But we do have plenty of sane critics - as I said before, get a Google alert on blogs mentioning "Wikipedia" - it's just the sites specially for the topic have tended in practice to be troll. nutter and sociopath magnets.
- d.