On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Denny Colt wrote:
This conversation spawned from some vehement
opposition to a proposed policy
to ban links to attack, outing, and hate sites aimed at hurting Wikipedians.
The policy is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Attack_sites
That has been getting Kafkaesque because the "policy" has been used to *ban
links in the discussion about the policy*. That's right, in discussing a
policy about whether attack sites may be linked to, nobody may ever use an
attack site as an example of why one might want to link to an attack site.
Someone responded that it's a dead issue.
Well, it's a live issue again.
How in the world is it possible to discuss a policy that is being enforced
ahead of time in a way which prevents discussion of its own merits?