Anthony wrote:
On 6/15/07, Andrew Gray wrote:
On 15/06/07, Anthony wrote:
On 6/15/07, Andrew Gray wrote:
The purpose is to stop the first google hit on someone's name being "self-promotional vanity tripe", which is a little cruel even when they did write the article - and when, as so often happens, they *didn't*, it's just nasty.
Most AFDs on people are filled with not particularly nice comments. It's dine we keep them for internal purposes, but it seems fair to stop leaving them obviously public to be stumbled upon. Blanking doesn't hide that there was a debate or hide the decision; what it *does* do is hide the most stupid excesses of the discussion.
The same could be said of requests for arbitration. Can we blank them too?
Well, we routinely dump frivolous ones...
Sure, but I wasn't talking about "frivolous ones". Rather, I was thinking of one in particular which contains such libel as "Anthony is a troll if there ever was one" and "I find Anthony a bit disturbed, to say the least". It's really fun to have that as the second Google hit for one's name.
I'm glad to see that you appreciate your true worth. ;-)
The more over the top a comment, the less the likelihood that it will be believed, especially if there is no reason given for making that statement.
Ec