</snip>
I hope you make a choice to support our productive
editors and administrators and do what is needful to protect them from harassment by
external sites. I know it is frustrating and offensive to be forced to do what you would
do voluntarily and with insight.
Then why not try a compromise solution? And since when did ArbCom get
the power to determine who our 'productive' editors and admins are,
let alone protect them? When was that added to the mandate?
If a naive editor got caught up in a major controversy
that is a shame. However, the bold pronouncements that the "vague" arbitration
remedy was void and the ignoring of warnings argue for a disingenuous breaching
experiment. A ban is open to such theater. The alternative is to open the site to drama, a
move which would not have a happy outcome.
This is a false dichotomy that insists on assuming bad faith. The only
reason that we are having the current drama is because of the ban. I
have a feeling that had the ArbCom not blanket-banned a website, we
would never have had any major drama, except possibly that which would
have been instigated by SlimVirgin over any link to WR.
Also, I think you are taking the 'vague' comment a little too
personally -- many people in the community think it was a vague
decision in the context in which the edit was made, because of the
ArbCom which apparently cannot make up its mind on whether the ban
applies to all 'Attack Sites' or just ED. It is also undeniable that
she was editing in good faith. To suggest that she should have stopped
because she had been warned is ridiculous. We don't expect our admins
to stop deleting pictures that are under bogus fair use rationales
because they've been warned by someone who doesn't understand policy
do we?
A dull site, devoted to work on the encyclopedia will
serve our readers and productive contributors better.
... Says you. I, and many others, think that it is not only very
valuable for a very restricted class of links, but we also in general
think that the ArbCom, and ArbCom members, should not be throwing
their weight around in content disputes that are not part of an
ongoing case.
Fred
Sincerely,
Silas Snider
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silas Snider is a proud member of the Association of Wikipedians Who
Dislike Making Broad Judgements About the Worthiness of a General Category
of Article, and Who Are In Favor of the Deletion of Some Particularly Bad
Articles, but That Doesn't Mean They are Deletionist
(AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTD) , and the Harmonious
Editing Club of Wikipedia.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------