On 7/3/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The person who did that got upset because he was
outed, and he reacted
badly, which he later admitted. It was a very human response, and it's
unfair to keep on using it as a weapon.
But that's going to be the normal use of this policy proposal. As far
as I can tell, people aren't creating new links to the Three Bad
Sites, so in that wise there are only the few hundred existing links
to be concerned with. Nobody at the moment does seem concerned (except
for MONGO's outburst against Wikitruth), so until the next time
someone tries to invoke one of them in an RfC or ArbCom action, they
do not enter into the picture. But sites like TNH's blog will be the
ones that are targetted, because we cannot keep them from naming
people when they see fit to do so; and the policy would be waiting for
someone to invoke against them.
What we're talking about is very simple.
What we are talking about is not at all simple. It takes place in a
context of considerable conflict of interest and in the realities of
interpersonal and group dynamics that no amount of good faith can
cover. You and MONGO and Jayjg spend a lot of time attacking WR, to
the point where it seems to me that you don't care about the side
effects of your campaign against them. I'm not really trying to
protect linking to them that much, but I think they should in general
be treated like other sites that we might link to. And yes: except for
the huge volume of wikilegal reference to WR, there isn't a lot of
strong reason to link to it. But people only really care about these
links because of the campaign to rease them in the first place.