The point under discussion is whether a blanket ban of
certain sites is
a good step to take.
It's a drastic remedy that cause almost as much trouble as it avoids, but is still
justifiable. What the ban on linking to Encyclopedia Dramatic accomplishes is to scotch
ready acceptance of that type of snarky dialog on Wikipedia itself. If we accept casual
links to whatever cute meme on ED that strikes someone's eye, what we are doing is
saying, hey, this site is cool. A little looking around at their entries on our
contributors will soon demonstrate the hurtful nature of their entries and the absence of
Part of the ban is posturing, very similar to our posturing on pedophilia. We have no way
to prevent either pedophiles or drama affectionados from editing Wikipedia. All we can do
is make a big noise about it. We will have snarky editors engaging in hurtful attacks on
other users both on and off Wikipedia no matter what we do. So what is involved is more
staking out a position than anything else.
So it is very much a matter of saying and meaning:
We will make every effort to support our contributors and to defeat attempts to harass
I fully agree, and I wonder why sites with attacking content, like
Conservapedia, have not been blacklisted already.