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

[Kamryn Matika]

On 7/2/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
>
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: The Mangoe [mailto:the.mangoe at gmail.com]
> >Sent: Monday, July 2, 2007 08:03 AM
> >To: 'English Wikipedia'
> >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] FredBauder"clarifies"onattack site link policy
> >
> >On 7/2/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> >> I did originate it though and am not intimidated. I shudder to
> contemplate what
> >> Mr. Goodman wants for Wikipedia. If a pack of dogs fall on someone
> after he and
> >> his ilk are in control, I guess we will simply be obligated to stand by
> and do
> >> nothing.
> >
> >The central problem in all of this is the hyperbole. At worst the
> >WR-ites are a bunch of malcontents whose not always coherent ravings
> >can be ignored by choosing not to visit their site. As a "pack of
> >dogs", they rank right up there in threat with a litter of Pekinese
> >pups.
> >
>
> I recall no arbitration ruling which relates to Wikipedia Review.
>
> Fred
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Why did you endorse my block if this is the case? The block was enacted
solely on the ruling in the MONGO case and was applied to my reverting to a
version of a page that contained a reference to Wikipedia Review. If there
was no arbitration ruling that relates to Wikipedia Review, how is the
justification for my block valid? Why did you support it?