[WikiEN-l] Re: No more blocking people for who they *are*?

[Ryan W. (Merovingian)]

Although I think you're right, I don't think any admins blocked people just for believing certain things.  Those who were blocked were acting in a way that justified their I-hate-to-call-it-punishment.

--Ryan

> From: Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] No more blocking people for who they *are*?
> 
> Hi all,
>    Just a thought in the wake of the pedophile thing. Could we agree
> not to ever again block people for what they are? No matter how
> disgusting, unpleasant, immoral etc. Such things always being at least
> somewhat objective, we should stick instead to only blocking people
> for actions.
> 
> In other words: If someone says, "I'm a pedophile", then by policy
> this should not be a reason to block them. If, on the other hand, they
> are trolling, and it works, then that becomes a blockable action -
> trolling.
> 
> I worry that there is a genuine slippery slope where "I am a
> pedophile" gets confused with "I am a terrorist", then "I am a member
> of Hamas" then "I support Eta"  and so on and so forth. Is it not
> better to simply say "We do not block people for statements of who
> they are or what they believe"?
> 
> Steve

-- 
___________________________________________________
Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/