[WikiEN-l] Self-sensorship, how far should it go?

[Anthony]

On 8/1/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/07, John Lee <johnleemk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/2/07, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > > Michael Noda wrote:
> > > > I would like to second all of what Andrew has said above.
> > >
> > > Thirded. I've been working on Wikipedia since mid 2001, I've been
> > > subscribed to this list for a couple of years now too, and I neither
> > > know nor really care all that much about all these details. What I _do_
> > > care about is the atmosphere that's being generated by it, both here
> > > on-wiki and in the general external public perception of what we do
> > > here. It's all just a tempest in a teapot in the grand scheme of things
> > > but it's a loud and annoying tempest that gets attention.
> > >
> > > I'm not going to go so far as to ask anyone to leave, but it would be
> > > really nice if everyone ratcheted down the drama a bit. If someone asks
> > > "hey, this link [1] says you're a secret agent who blew up Locherbie,
> > > what's with that?" Just give a plain answer explaining how the article's
> > > written by a loonie with an axe to grind. Dollars to donuts most people
> > > will go "oh, okay" and move on. Using all this mysterious "Oversight"
> > > and "Attack Sites" stuff to wipe the question from existence only makes
> > > things worse.
> >
> >
> > I'll second everything Bryan says. I don't agree that Jay, ElinorD, et al,
> > ought to take a wikibreak, but we do need to take a step back and chill out.
>
> Huh? What does this have to do with me? I thought Andrew was
> suggesting the people who insist on discussing this on the list and on
> Wikipedia should take a break.
>
What would make the most sense is if Sarah just switched to a new
account.  Her hope for remaining pseudonymous using User:SlimVirgin is
quickly dwindling to nil, and the vain attempts to change this
situation are doing nothing but cause problems for the project.