On 10/2/06, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote: [snip]
Sorry if I *do* contradict you. You are one of the most reasonable people on wikipedia, so I would hope that you would take my contradiction of what you said above in the same spirit. I wish to reason with the unreasonable statements in the paragraph above.
Advertisements are *not* useful money. They detract from our mission, and the value that is added to our content by people who do not feel advertisements are useful. I *will* argue the point if needed. But I think I have argued that already in another place.
I did not intend to advocate accepting advertising but rather make the point that so many of us are so aggressive at rejecting paid advertising, which is a subject that reasonable people can disagree on, ... and that we should be no less aggressive in our rejection of the abuse of our service for advertising.
No matter what arguments can be made FOR us running ads, none apply to turning a blind eye to the abuse of our service. ... and yet almost all of the arguments against running ads apply to tolerating the inclusion of advertising.
I would argue that we are already fairly intolerant of advertising, at least when a Wikipedian sees it... but until we ensure that we can back up our good community practices with legal recourse against repeated offenders it can still be easily argued that we are fairly tolerant.