On 27 Mar 2007 at 11:13, "Steve Bennett" <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
But is that the point? If a credible legal threat it
made, we might as
well just delete the thing first and ask questions later. No single
article is worth getting sued over - whether the Foundation would win
the case or not.
But if we take that attitude, then anybody who wants to suppress
anything will just have to make such a 'credible legal threat',
knowing that we'll roll over and play dead. Sometimes it's necessary
to take a stand on principle.
On a different but related matter, I notice that on the talk page of
the admin who deleted the article there's this gem:
The fact that the project is apparently being sued by the subject (a
fact I had no knowledge of when I deleted) makes the recklessness of
trying to undelete this mindbogglingly stupid. Frankly, anyone who is
seriously wanting to fight this one should be hard-banned as a total
liability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Doc_glasgow
So, apparently all of us who have the temerity to disagree with him
on this ought to be banned from Wikipedia. Maybe some of the critics
are right about there being fascistic tendencies among some of the
admins.
--
== 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/