On 4/25/07, Daniel R. Tobias <dan(a)tobias.name> wrote:
Some of the commentary referred to "enforcing the
MONGO ArbCom
decision", and it's a perfect example of why I consider that
decision, at least the part of it that imposed a ban on linking to
"attack sites", was a bad idea.
I think that decision is being misunderstood, i really don't think it
was meant in the context of something like a Signpost article (which
is very neutral and has a journalistic purpose). I think it would be a
good thing to ask the arbcom for a clarification in this matter,
whether or not that policy applies to the signpost. I mean, they have
a whole section for stuff like that on WP:RFAR.
--Oskar