On 6/11/06, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
We have already deleted or blanked pages that the subjects haven't wanted, so tell me: what is so different about Daniel Brandt that we absolutely refuse to do it for him, despite the chaos it has caused? (And if you say it's in part because of the chaos it has caused, that confirms that we're simply digging our heels in, which is understandable but irrational.)
Principles aside, we simply have no reason to believe that Brandt would actually stop coming after Wikipedia if his article were removed. Taking down the Hivemind pages -- even assuming that no copies will be put up by anyone else -- would only be the beginning, since much of his most damaging activity has been at WR, rather than directly on his own sites.