New subject: Please stop this Re: The Second Rape: Victim-Blaming (was Re: Self-sensorship, how far should it go?)

3 Aug 2007

On 3 Aug 2007 at 08:16:48 +0100, ElinorD &lt;elinordf(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

...
  It's not possible to hush up this rumour, but it
should be possible to
 create an environment where contributors who have given a lot to Wikipedia
 and have been harassed as a result can feel that they have the support of
 the community. Creating such an environment is good for Wikipedia, but I
 sometimes feel that's overlooked. As one of the MONGO rulings said,
 "Wikipedia users, especially administrators, will not permit a user under
 attack to be isolated, but will support them. This may include reverting
 harassing edits, protecting or deleting pages, blocking users, or taking
 other appropriate action." 
But what happens when Slim and her friends, acting in "solidarity" as 
encouraged by that ruling, become persecutors themselves, ganging up 
on people who are critical of or opposed to them, or otherwise are 
perceived as "enemies"?

In the "real world", the categories of "victim" and
"persecutor" are 
far from being completely disjoint, as seen repeatedly in history.  
The Christians were persecuted and martyred by the Romans, but later 
gained political power and perpetrated the Crusades and the 
Inquisition.  The Serbs and Croats, the Irish Catholics and 
Protestants, the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds, and lots of other sets 
of groups, have alternated between being the victims of persecution 
and being the perpetrators of it.  Why should things be any different 
with the personalities and groups on Wikipedia?

-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

Re: [WikiEN-l] Please stop this Re: The Second Rape: Victim-Blaming (was Re: Self-sensorship, how far should it go?)