Rich Holton wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
This is not about Brandt or the bloody-minded obsession that some have expressed about Brandt. This place is about building an encyclopedia, and that should take precedence over who happens to have made the edit.
I am often appalled by the lack of understanding for principles of fundamental justice in some people's attitudes. A person whose character is questioned in a public forum needs to have an equivalent right to defend himself in an equally public forum.
Agreed as well. Of course, the banned user will have a *very short* leash even on the talk page about them. But they must be allowed to speak on their own behalf to correct a clear error on a page about them.
I can live with the short leash. I did suggest a while back that there be a place in an article for a living subject to respond relatively freely. This got shot down because it restricted the rights of others to edit what he was saying. Some of the other complaints about it probably have easy fixes. Something of the sort would likely go a long way to addressing the frustrations that some subjects must feel when their rights to set the record straight about their own personal information A prohibition against their talking about anyone else in the protected section would keep the leash short.
Ec