-----Original Message----- From: David Goodman [mailto:dgoodmanny@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2007 12:38 PM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattack site link policy
Unless I am mistake, hasn't it been stated above that the ruling only applied to ED, but yet KM was apparently blocked for linking to WR.
KM's edit summary n inserting the links was "vague ArbCom statements from 8 months ago aren't policy. that ArbCom case pertained to ED and the links were being used for harassment. this link is genuinely informative." http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Essjay_controversy&diff=next&a... and on examining what was inserted, no confidential or abusive material was linked to.
DGG
The link works now
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=ef3096386ce262da3f7f46267ff4e783&...
It appears to be an exercise in outing a Wikipedia editor. It turned out to be a pretty productive outing, but the fact remains that's what it was.
It is not as obnoxious in hindsight as it was when posted, as the matter of Essjay contains important lessons. I can remember when he showed up wondering where he came from. Then when I read his biography it seemed to make sense. So I accepted him, when it would have been better if none of us had.
The problem is that for every hit they make WR has 10 false positives that they are busy investigating. Ferreting out the identity of our anonymous editors and administrators is not helpful to use or our productive users.
The welfare of our productive users and administrators, our workers, is far more important than accommodating our critics. We should do what we can to protect them from harassment both on and off wiki, especially by sites devoted to harassment.
Fred
On 7/5/07, Kamryn Matika kamrynmatika@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/5/07, Adrian aldebaer@googlemail.com wrote:
Daniel R. Tobias schrieb:
On 5 Jul 2007 at 03:42:01 +0000, "Fred Bauder" fredbaud@waterwiki.info
wrote:
Part of the ban is posturing
So it's kind of like the "security theatre" we have to endure every time
we travel by air... lots of
silly rules, enforced in an arbitrary, draconian way, with all sorts of
inconvenience to innocent
people, which probably doesn't do much or anything at all to prevent
actual terrorism, but
which show everybody that the authorities are Doing Something.
So it is very much a matter of saying and meaning:
We will make every effort to support our contributors and to defeat
attempts to harass them.
...and we don't care how many contributors we need to harrass in order
to accomplish this!
KamrynMatika seems possibly to have been run off in this way now.. at
least, she's blanked
out her user and talk pages and hasn't made any appearance in a couple
of days, after
getting into conflict with the "draconian-link-ban" people.
Dan Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/
Dan, please don't take this the wrong way, but KamrynMatika's 245 mainspace edits are rather negligible compared to the tens of thousands of edits the most attacked Wikipedians have contributed. If protecting several of our more prolific editors from attacks means that some fairly new users get disgruntled (which I do not quite understand in the first place), then, well, that's an acceptable price to pay.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Thanks. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l