[WikiEN-l] Arbcom has completely lost its mind

[Jonathan]

To even consider that the guidelines are draconian also implies that 
they have been tried before. The question is that do such ideas work. 
The reply obviously is not everybody agrees that they work, and they 
don't want to go backwards repeat history.

We need new ideas and new systems developed to handle information 
without censorship and to put a definite bounds on "disreputable," as it 
(by past experience) may deemed to mean one thing or another thing from 
time to time. It is a decision by ArbCom, but it is not stable in 
implementation.

Steve Bennett wrote:

>On 2/8/06, SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Pedophilia_userbox_wheel_war/Proposed_decision#User_pages
>>We have gone from a "live and let live" culture to one of political
>>correctness, where anything that could "bring the project into
>>disrepute" is a bad thing. This just leaves me totally speechless, to
>>the point where I'm considering making my user page more and more
>>"disreputable" until I am blocked.
>>    
>>
>
>Yes. That will certainly help the situation.
>
>There are reasons these kinds of draconian guidelines are being
>written up - because there is a genuine problem that needs to be
>solved. Maybe you could propose a more constructive way of solving it.
>
>Steve
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>  
>