On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipedia@ntlworld.com wrote:
When a victim tries to get a correction, the whole deck is stacked against them. Edit Wikipedia and get hit with COI. E-mail OTRS and you're dealing with a non-editorial non-authority, who might not believe who you are, and probably won't accept your own testimony as other than worthless. Even if you convince the OTRS person, he might well get reverted by someone who can't see the e-mails.
OTRS is not that bad, at least as far as I know. The volunteers there are supposed to be friendly (at least polite) as long as the person does not behave very aggresively. The only problem I am aware of is backlog ([[m:OTRS/volunteering]] is the only answer here).
Now, along comes another way of people setting the record straight, and you reject it because a) it doesn't comply with policy b) people may pay $1,000 to impersonate someone c) you choose to be cynical about their identity checking d) it doesn't make sense to you.
It would have the same value as the statement published on the person's own website; I see no reason to give it more value than any other statement issued by the person in question themselves.
The bottom line is that you are representative of the most cynical, irresponsible BLP attitudes on Wikipedia, and if we were serious about our responsibilities here, people with you cavalier attitude would be banned from BLPs, and BLP process, as a positive menace.
That sort of personal attack would do no good, please refrain from it.
--vvv