Posted on behalf of Daniel Brandt, at his request:
I feel that Jimmy Wales made the wrong decision when he unbanned me a couple of days ago. I had asked that my article be deleted, along with the Talk pages, and my User and User_talk pages too. I am not interested in editing Wikipedia, and never have been, apart from my desire and need to comment on why I objected to that article on me, in whole and in part.
I ask that Mr. Wales reconsider. If the article still exists several weeks from now, I will formally appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. Since Erik is a trustee (at least until June), he may have a chance to cast his vote on this issue at that time. If the Board declines to get involved, then this will introduce an additional level of confusion over the distribution of power and responsibility within Wikipedia.
Since the structure of Wikipedia has a direct bearing on the content offered by Wikipedia, this distribution of power has legal implications. Let me put it bluntly: While it may be true that the Foundation Board of Trustees does not seek to shape content apart from its control over moderation privileges through the software it develops and the servers it owns, it is still true that the Board has the power to summarily delete content. Failure to do so is actionable if the content is illegal, assuming that the Board is made aware of the situation. I don't think anyone seriously disputes this. If it is a matter of dispute, then this is what I hope to clarify someday in a court of law.
Erik thinks very highly of Wikipedia's mission, and feels that the topics it chooses to cover should enjoy sanctuary from outside interference -- Wikipedia exists in the wonderful world of cyberspace, where real-world laws don't apply. The only concession he makes is that the subject's wishes are "one factor": the victim gets to say some final words before execution.
That is not a realistic point of view. It is especially unrealistic given the fact that hordes of anonymous editors, many of them underage, are creating Wikipedia's content, and can change it at any time.
It was pointed out by another that I'm neither powerful enough nor rich enough to give Wikipedia any trouble, and therefore it follows that Wikipedia should ignore me. As pathetic and immoral as this viewpoint may be, it is the logical extension of Erik's position. If Erik is wrong, it's the death of Wikipedia in the short-term. And if Erik is right, it's still the death of Wikipedia, but now perhaps in the longer-term.
I think Mr. Wales should delete my article, with the understanding that in this case he is acting for the Board. It would save everyone a lot of trouble.
-- Daniel Brandt