On 5/30/07, The Mangoe <the.mangoe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 30 May 2007, Slim Virgin wrote:
The problem with that, Joe, is that some members
of the "community"
who've been particularly vocal on the linking issue are regular
posters to Wikipedia Review. Mango, for example, posts as Papaya.
Should the people who keep these sites going be the ones to decide our
policy on linking to them?
Well, that makes about as much sense as rhetorically asking whether
the people whom these sites criticize should be deciding our policy on
linking to them.
I'm not THAT willing to defend WR. It's not all that good, a lot of
the time, but it also isn't as bad as various people keep claiming.
It's extremely difficult for me to assume good faith of you in this
discussion. You recently posted to Wikipedia and to Wikipedia Review a
post you found on some discussion board, purporting to be from
"SlimVirgin," where I supposedly invited animal rights supporters to
come to Wikipedia surreptitiously, so that a bunch of us (we who are
already embedded!) would make sure the new arrivals got adminship,
because "we own" Wikipedia and we want to subvert articles about AR.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/No…
As if the gross assumption of bad faith and stupidity wasn't enough,
you said you'd found the post while searching around Google looking
for my identity.
This is the kind of bullshit behavior that we don't want to encourage,
because it has *nothing* to do with writing an encyclopedia, and
*everything* to do with trying to upset the people who do.