On 4/25/07, Daniel R. Tobias <dan(a)tobias.name> wrote:
This week, Wikipedia Signpost has an article about the latest
developments in the Daniel Brandt flap:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2007-04-
23/Brandt_unblock
The original version, by Michael Snow, included a link to Brandt's
Wikipedia Watch site, which was relevant to the article because it
was in fact being discussed there.
Michaelas10 then removed the link, using "Attack site" as his edit
summary.
The problem with the proposal is that people want to impose strict
liability.
If someone posts personal attacks off-wiki, and then links to them in
order to make the personal attacks on-wiki, then that's just as bad as
posting them on-wiki in the first place and should be treated
similarly. I haven't seen anyone disagreeing with this.
But the proposal aims to make any link, to any part of any site that
carries bad material somewhere on it, impossible. That's remarkably
shortsighted.
--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain(a)gmail.com
I have no idea who Daniel Brandt is, but he sure knows how to get attention
and keep it directed at him forever.
KP