Daniel Mayer wrote:
tc wrote:
But I'll try to believe that his actions
are merited by his good-intentioned but
unnecessary efforts to follow the GFDL on
behalf of 142 and not based on a goal of
censoring anything written by 142.
It is not a matter of me censoring anything. He has
already been hard banned so everything he writes is in
violation of that ban and should be removed from the
top edits of articles. Not doing so invalidates the
ban and implicitly gives permission to everyone that
the activity that the user was banned for is at worst
OK and at best not something we try to stop.
The issue of whether 142 should be banned is not being questioned. The
debate is about three articles on Meta that Anthère considers worth
keeping and improving based on their contents. Mav has said himself
that 142 has made more contributions to Meta than anyone else, so we're
talking about only 3 articles out of a large number. Let's not take
this will to purge the project of anything related to 142 to the point
of being monomaniacal. I'm confident that if given enough time Anthère
will be able to edit the article so that it no longer resembles what 142
wrote. Give her a little room to work.
The argument of protecting 142's copyrights is laughable. He is after
all still an anonymous user. Anonymity does not override a person's
copyrights, but it makes proving them that much more difficult. Can he,
as whatever legal person claims those copyrights, prove that he is the
same person that we know under a numercial synonym. Furthermore, if and
when he gets to the point of issuing a take-down order (with which we
would be most willing to comply) the article(s) in question may no
longer resemble what he put there in the first place.
Ec