Thomas Dalton wrote:
Are we more concerned about a list intended to improve Wikipedia than we are about a list and forum used to harm Wikipedia?
There are things we can do about Wikipedia mailing lists and Wikipedians. There is nothing (or, at least, very little) we can do about Wikipedia Review. They are completely independent and can and will do whatever they like. The only way we can do anything to stop them is by legal action (I haven't investigated the matter closely enough to know if they've done anything worthy of such action).
There is secret mailing list being used to coordinate intentional harm to the project. You are right that we can't do anything about the existence of the list. But we can deal with the Wikipedia users who are involved by publicizing their intent and by addressing their on-Wiki efforts. We shouldn't turn a blind eye to intentional disruption.
There have been other, more public attempts to coordinate activity against Wikipedia or its content. An example from a couple of years ago was the effort by users of the StormFront website to "correct" WP articles on topics of interest to them. Wikipedia editors found out about it and blocked the effort. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-02-07/Advocac...
If folks are planning to harm or disrupt Wikipedia then obviously that effort should be resisted rather than ignored. From Blissyu2's comments it appears that WR's secret mailing list has many subscribers, and apparently every member can read the members-only forum. If Wikipedia users see disruption being planned then it would be helpful if they'd report it either to the community at large or at least to folks who can do something about it.
Will Beback