charles matthews wrote:
"Steve Bennett" wrote
Could we agree
not to ever again block people for what they are?
Easy to say that in the context that Wikipedia is not under siege, and
has its reputation pretty much intact. What about the guy who arrives
in the middle of an election and annouces "I'm being funded to remove
all your bias on candidates' pages"?
If he does it according to *our* concept of bias, then huzzah.
Anyway, unless the person supplies real name and funding details,
the statement isn't verifiable and doesn't need to be taken that
seriously. Does everybody automatically believe everything they
read on user pages or something?
Stan