David Gerard wrote:
We've both made errors on Wikipedia, and I'm sure we've both apologized as appropriate. If you have a personal reason for making sure I understand those errors correctly then let's pursue this off-list.
My reason is that you are here making policy proposals that would cover a case of your own actions. I wouldn't have brought it up otherwise.
Please state your understanding of why your actions were wrong. You're making proposals for how to deal with such cases in the future, so your thinking on the matter is clearly of direct relevance. I really don't see how you can claim or imply it isn't.
- d.
Every policy on Wikipedia applies to every editor. We don't say that those who wish to use citations can't participate in drafting our verifiability standards, or that those who have made or been the target of personal attacks may not participate in revising [[WP:NPA]]. We allow everyone, even sock puppets and anonymous editors, to change our policies if they can find a consensus.
I've explained myself in the past, making a prompt and sincere apology at the time admitting my error, and have made an occasional comment since then. If you think it's important that I understand more then I'd be happy to have a private conversation about it with you. But I don't think that my opinion is worth less because I've been harassed and tried to do something about it. In fact, the opinions of those with experience should count for more.
Making proposal is not a crime, and I'm just trying to move the debate forward. If you don't agree with it then speak against it or don't support it. This isn't a referendum on whether Will Beback was right or wrong for two hours in May. This is an issue that concerns at least dozens of editors who've faced serious off-Wiki harassment due to their editing of the encyclopedia. Let's keep the focus on finding a resolution.
Will