[WikiEN-l] Another conflict regarding linking to"attack sites"

[Ken Arromdee]

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Slim Virgin wrote:
> > >Having said that, the BADSITES proposal was probably unnecessary, and
> > >it attracted the attention of editors who want to be able to link to
> > >those sites because they post on them, which led to a lot of pointless
> > >fighting. I think it's a better idea to have a sentence or two about
> > >attack sites in NPA or the blocking policy.
> > >
> > I think the whole thing was phony. It served as a platform for them, so they could argue their points.
> 
> I agree. They had a field day.

Are you accusing me of being phony, or objecting to the proposal because I
post on WR (hint: I'm not on WR), or being a sockpuppet, or otherwise not
sincerely objecting to the proposal because I think it's a bad idea?