On 5/30/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
An aggressive and vocal minority of users (including
some administrators who
are known to aggressively hammer 'opponents') wanting to be able to remove
on-Wiki references and links to web sites that specifically have targeted
them. In and of itself, this is not a Bad Thing on the surface. However,
their implementation and ideas do not enjoy widespread community support or
endorsement, as evidenced by the backlash they face each time they try to do
it. In spite of this, they have now extended this to:
1. Damaging articles and the encyclopedia (Will Beback and his abuse during
over Teresa Hayden's site).
2. Specifically have 'broken' two RFAs by dropping poison pills on them
(Cla68 and Gracenotes), disrupting Wikipedia for political gain.
3. They have made the notion of "attack sites" political and sociological
poison, to damage their Wikipedia "enemies".
Someone really needs to throw out the bathwater, without murdering the baby
as seems to be the intent here with the BADSITES gamesmanship. Apologies for
any frankness that cuts through undeserved AGF.
"Damaging the articles and Wikipedia"? "disrupting Wikipedia for
political gain"? "murdering the baby"? Joe, I know it's important to
you to win this argument, and you appear willing to hurl almost any
accusation in order to do so, but seriously, you're frothing at the
mouth now. Take a chill pill, man.