[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[Skyring]

On 6/1/07, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
>
>
> This is the site that welcomed AMorrow with open arms.  This is the site
> that Daniel Brandt regularly contributes to.  This is the site that
> organised severe harrassment of Phil Sandifer, then lied about their
> motives.  This is the site that drove Katefan0, *an admin who even they
> couldn't fault*, away from Wikipedia out of pure meanness of spirit.
> This is the site where, when a board administrator mentioned that
> revealing personal information was frowned-upon, the rest told that
> fellow: "Speak for yourself."
>
> Wikipedia Review, in theory, could turn out not to be a cesspool.  In
> theory, it could even be a reasonable, useful, intelligent forum.  Many
> WR posters are very intelligent; some of them are even sane.  Skyring is
> one obvious example of a reasonable poster, as is Blu Ardvaark (when
> he's on his meds), and I assume you, sir, would like to claim that title
> as well.  But having one or two reasonable members is nothing to boast
> about, when the overall site and tone of the site is so filthy.


I haven't posted to WR in ages. I forget the exact circumstances of
Katefan0, but the situation was that she was a blameless editor who just
happened to attract the attention of WR. I looked at her edits, couldn't
find anything remotely objectionable in them, said as much, but that didn't
wash with the wider WR. I think there's a lot of "let's make this person's
wikilife a misery, because we can" mentality.

What amuses me about WR is that it represents the flip side of WP. You'll
see exactly the same misguided crusaders, the same unthinking harassment,
the same well, everything.

-- 
Peter in Canberra