On 25/02/2008, WJhonson@aol.com WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
The evidence has been presented.
It has not
BC's response or lack thereof is noted there.
Doesn't appear to be anything to respond to.
The actions of the bot were unnecessarily aggressive.
Really? So why are there still all these problem images. The date of the deadline has been know for nearly a year.
the actions of its owner elicited vocal calls from established editors.
Enforcing copyright policy has never made anyone popular.
Ignoring the situation does not improve the project.
The situation is not being ignored. Many many answers have been provided. Copyright law and wikipedia policy have been explained in more ways and to more people than any sane person would want to. The workings of the but have been covered ad nasuam. Now either produce an evidence based logical objection that you are prepared to defend or admit you can't.