[WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattack site link policy

[Daniel R. Tobias]

On 2 Jul 2007 at 09:33:36 +0100, "Tony Sidaway" 
<tonysidaway at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/2/07, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:
> > and a matter to be considered in future elections.  as a reference
> > point, Fred's term expires at the end of 2007.
> 
> My! You're a nasty bit of work, aren't you?  Fred didn't make that
> decision alone.

Given that the pro-link-ban side has been known to use their cliquish 
power to torpedo people's election (in RfAs) using political litmus 
tests, why is it so absurd to do the same on the other side?  The 
time I declined to descend to the same tactics, and supported rather 
than opposing ElinorD for admin despite disagreeing with her position 
on the issue, it came back to bite me when she made enforcement of 
the so-called policy a top priority, even taking it to levels beyond 
other pro-link-ban admins by actually deleting talk pages and 
recreating them with offending link insertions removed from the 
history.  This makes me inclined to emulate the other side and take a 
zero tolerance approach to electing anybody to any position if they 
are involved in making or enforcing this link ban.  That would likely 
include others in the next election in addition to Fred, so he 
wouldn't be singled out, though lately he seems to be taking the most 
visibly ridiculous stance on the issue.

The way Fred is currently extending the original ArbCom decision, 
it's like because a Supreme Court decision once observed that yelling 
"Fire" in a crowded theater wasn't protected by the First Amendment, 
now judges at all levels were enforcing this as a ban on saying or 
writing the word "fire" in all contexts, like for instance censoring 
the show "The Apprentice" because Trump says "You're Fired".

-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/