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?