[WikiEN-l] A BADSITES RfA piling-on

[MacGyverMagic/Mgm]

On 5/28/07, Daniel R. Tobias <dan at tobias.name> wrote:
>
> Another thing in the subject of the BADSITES controversy, take a look
> at this Request for Adminship:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Gracenotes
>
> (not to be confused with [[User:Grace Note]], a totally separate
> person, and one who actually is one of the opposers in the above
> nomination; interestingly, though "Grace" is usually a girl's name,
> they're both guys, which shows you can never reliably infer gender
> from usernames)
>
> This user has been the subject of a massive piling-on of oppose
> votes, most of them coming simply because he refuses to take a
> totally politically correct position favoring the draconian, zero-
> tolerance policy on removing links to so-called "attack sites".
>
> Despite (or maybe because of) this, he's also got more support votes
> than any other current RfA (it's currently 161 to 60, meaning that
> 101 more people support him than oppose him), but this might not be a
> high enough percentage to satisfy whoever closes the RfA (is there a
> set percentage, or is it just up to a subjective value judgment like
> most other debate-closing on Wikipedia?)
>
> There are some people in the Support column who are notable for
> saying that they oppose him on the attack-sites issue but still don't
> consider it a "litmus test" that bars their support for him (after
> all, having administrator's tools has little or no connection with
> one's beliefs or actions regarding attack-site links... adding,
> dropping, restoring, and edit-warring over such links does not
> require admin powers).  However, a bunch of others seem to be single-
> issue voters determined to torpedo any prospective admin who doesn't
> toe the line entirely.


Is it just Wikipedia Review that is the issue in this RFA or are there other
attack sites relevant to this RFA. I think there could be good reasons to
link to it in a discussion for example an RFA if doing so can make something
clear like a candidate's point of view. Of course care should used, but not
linking them at all for any reason at all is not productive.

Mgm