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

[Phil Boswell]

"Mark Wagner" <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote in 
message news:31073ef90602071549v22ddf451w3e14def1dfe1f540 at mail.gmail.com...
On 2/7/06, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> > While I agree with the general point, slippery slope arguments are
> > usually pretty weak.
> The problem is that the step from "admitted pedophiles" to
> "pedophiles" has already been taken, and from there, it's a *very*
> small step to "accused pedophiles", an illustrious group that includes
> Ta bu shi da yu, Schissel, and Lucky 6.9, all named by "Parents for
> the Online Safety of Children", Jtdirl, Gmaxwell, and me, all named by
> Jeff Merkey, and no doubt others.

I was labelled a "pedophile" by well-known Usenet-kook John Grubor about 10 
years ago; you can look it up in newsgroup archives easily enough. It was 
his favourite method of attacking anybody who stumbled into his line of 
fire, and is practically a badge of honour (not so much a Purple Heart as a 
Vaguely Lilac Heart :-).

This is not the sort of thing I want to be slung about like slurry outside 
the town hall[1]...it would not, for example, have been easy to explain to 
non-technical Social Workers when we adopted our daughter.

The fact remains: I have been accused thereof, it's verifiable: what if 
somebody decides it would be a good idea to paste it into my User Page?
-- 
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
[1] traditional form of protest employed by disgrunlted UK farmers :-)