On Wed, 30 May 2007, David Gerard wrote:
It is limited to three sites; the trouble is that a zero tolerance policy still has the problems of a zero tolerance policy. There are some reasons why we might want to link to even those three sites. They may be rare reasons, but they are not nonexistent reasons. Removing the link from Wikipedia Signpost and removing the links from the attack sites discussion are bad ideas, and a zero tolerance policy leaves no room for such unusual cases.
Perhaps if we mandate {{spoiler}} tags around each mention ... ;-p
By the anti-spoiler crowd's reasoning, we could just refuse to ban links to attack sites on the grounds that deciding whether something is an attack site constitutes original research.