[Foundation-l] Fwd: [WL-News] Wikimedia Foundation in danger of losing immunity under the Communications Decency Act

[Anthony]

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Michael Snow <wikipedia at verizon.net> wrote:
> Quite so. If anyone asks you to help with something they could
> accomplish just as well without you, it's entirely your decision whether
> or not to assist. "I'm not comfortable participating, ask someone else"
> is totally fine as an answer.
>
> --Michael Snow
>

True, but I'd still say such a situation is pretty much identical to
the WMF performing the action itself.

It's an interesting situation, because the act of deleting the article
is certainly not illegal.  I guess it's embarrassing?  Or bad PR?  I
don't know.  If you read my earlier posts you'll see I don't really
understand why the WMF doesn't just perform the deletion itself.

I guess my difficulty in coming up with a good analogy is that I was
thinking of actions which were bad things, but the action of deleting
a libelous article is a good one.  So here goes.  If I leave a bag of
saplings out on my front porch and I ask someone to plant a tree in my
front yard, is it far to say that I planted a tree in my front yard?
What if I just tell the person that the location of the saplings and
"explain to some length" how cool it would be if I had a tree there?

Then some newspaper story comes out about how I planted a tree in my
front yard, and when asked about the story I say something like "there
is absolutely no truth to that story and I'm shocked that anyone would
engage in such shoddy journalism".

Anthony