That's not responsibility. As reluctant as I am to use the word, that's caving to censorship. I'm 100% for curbing any attempts to spam the thing all over the place. We don't tolerate spamming campaigns, never have, never should. At the same time, the NYT, Wired, and the like are hardly "the mob". They're reliable sources that we cite across hundreds or probably thousands of articles. And "reliable sources are in control" is, if not stated that way specifically, fully in keeping with our core principles. The real mob (or, in this case, thug) here is the industry organization trying to prohibit mention of a number. The message we send if we cave is "Thugs are in control, if they're potentially big and nasty enough."
On 5/4/07, Fred Bauder fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Todd Allen [mailto:toddmallen@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 4, 2007 06:42 AM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Press coverage listing the HD-DVD key
Because, if everyone else in the world is publishing it and linking to it, and we're running around worrying that the sky will fall if anyone breathes a mention of the Forbidden Number, we're going to look ridiculous. And rightly so, that -is- ridiculous.
We're going to look responsible. Most important, we're going to look like the mob is not in control.
Fred
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l