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

[David Gerard]

On 03/07/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/2/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> > That's a site that was blocked after sliding all the way down the
> > "slippery slope", in the best of faith.

> A "slide" that lasted all of couple of hours, and was quickly
> reversed. Hardly a crisis.


The problem is that it was in the best of faith, and was nevertheless
stupid and damaging.


> > BADSITES is an odious, stupid and damaging policy. Please stop pushing it.

> This isn't about the BADSITES policy, this is about the MONGO case.


This is about the policy bearing an unmistakable resemblance to
BADSITES, where editors are *actually being blocked* for edits which
the arbitrator who wrote the original wording in the case says aren't
covered by it.

How is this not a problem? How is arbitrary blocking under guise of a
woefully misinterpreted arbitration decision not a problem?


- d.