David Yellope wrote:
If there are individuals who are actually stalking someone, I'm all for bringing the heavy end of the hammer down on them. A friend of mine, an English Wikipedia Admin/Check User (who happens to post on WR herself!) was stalked by a banned user on Wikipedia, and her stalker was subsequently jailed for it (as a parole violation of a previous stalking conviction). (I'd link you to her story on Wikipedia Review, but it's in a member only section). So to say I support stalkers and harassers would be an untruth.
But let's make sure we are dealing with the stalkers and the harassers and them only, and not using too broad a brush here.
That's the crux of the problem. Most of us do not participate in these dramas so that by the time we get to hear of them there appears to be a presumption of guilt, and an absence of real evidence.
If the stalking behaviour happened on wiki it would be more convincing to have specific links to the precise place where the threats were made. Those that do such things can probably all do it in one or two sentences. They don't require long-winded explanations trying to explain why those couple sentences constitute stalking.
Off-wiki stalking is mostly beyond our control. If you can't even link to the offensive comments what are the rest of us to make of it when you can't provide evidence. My own appreciation of natural justice and fairness does not allow me to simply agree to the facts of an accusation just because someone has made the claim.
If you believe that you have a real case of off-wiki stalking regular law-enforcement and the courts may be your only option.
Ec