On 3/15/06, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/15/06, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
Why is it not a good comparison? There are many people who would argue that Satanists are no better than Stormfront members (possibly worse, if you believe the network-TV exposes on "satanic cults").
If indeed an individual keeps making superficially neutral edits that turn out not to be, then I would favor banning them---but *because of that*, not because they happen to be a neo-Nazi, or a pedophile, or a Satanist, or whatever the moral-panic-du-jour is.
My point wasn't so much about the type of person editing (although an argument can be made that our level of care here should be directly proportional to the size and intensity of the pitchfork-wielding mob after Jimbo if we screw up), but about the type of article. Biographies, being highly susceptible to defamation and the like, are of significantly less risk than articles on general topics.
Are there some particular biographies where we should be wary of Satanist manipulation? ;-)
Kirill Lokshin
And that should be *more* risk, of course!
Kirill Lokshin