George Herbert wrote:
On Dec 6, 2007 5:19 PM, Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
Another Cade Metz article on Wikipedia, following in the heels of the last one:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/12/06/wikipedia_and_overstock/
Daniel;
While I feel it's fine for everyone to have their say, including Bagley, I'm somewhat dissapointed that you participated in helping a writer create a puff piece that completely dismissed Bagley's long and well documented history of dangerous stalking and harrassment activities.
What he's done online makes it completely unsuitable for him to ever edit Wikipedia again.
Cade is clearly looking for and finding controversy. The Register thrives on that. The reality is rather different. Rendering aid and comfort to people who behave sociopathically online is not in the best interests of the project.
Hi George,
Dan is quoted in Cade's article: "I don't want to be portrayed as being on Bagley's side. I'm just in favor of being fair and balanced with everybody," Tobias says. "I very strongly dislike censorship and any attempt to control what people can say and what they can read."
I found this too: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Judd_Bagley&oldid=156552252
That's what you meant about Mr Bagley, I suppose.
Thanks