[WikiEN-l] Durova/!! matter now in newspaper.

[Ken Arromdee]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2007, Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> >If you create anti-Giano type rules because you want anti-Sweaty-Cunt type
> >rules, your rules need a little more fine tuning.  Don't use extreme examples
> >of something to justify going against the non-extreme examples.
> 
> Anti-Giano rules?  Which rules do we have that were designed to
> inhibit Giano's article writing?

Please don't interpret statements with ridiculous levels of literalness.  It
should be clear that I meant "rules aimed at this behavior of Giano's",
even if they aren't literally anti-Giano in the sense of not letting him do
anything at all.

The point is that Giano *isn't* Sweaty Cunt; his behavior was much milder and
had at least some justification behind it.  If you have to justify preventing
Giano's behavior by claiming you're preventing Sweaty Cunt's behavior, there's
something wrong.

I'm sort of reminded of the spoiler warning argument.  Opponents kept pointing
to spoilers on Romeo and Juliet and nursery rhymes.  Was the ban on spoiler
warnings limited to Romeo and Juliet or nursery rhymes, or equally serious
cases?  Of course not.  The extreme examples were used as an excuse to
justify banning the less extreme examples.