[WikiEN-l] A BADSITES RfA piling-on

[Matthew Brown]

On 5/28/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 28, 2007, at 5:34 PM, Slim Virgin wrote:
> > That is where we fundamentally disagree. Admins are there to protect
> > the encyclopedia and the people who create it. We can't offer much
> > protection, it's true, but we *can* remove links to websites set up
> > for the sole purpose of making those people feel miserable.
>
> And Gracenotes, in my reading of his RFA, does not disagree with
> this. But in the face of such blinding idiocy as Will Beback's
> removing citations to reliable sources, is it any wonder that he's a
> little suspicious of the merits of a bright line distinction here?

I wholly agree.

I note that Gracenotes appears to have said that what he is
uncomfortable with is a blanket ban with no room for judgment or
common sense.

The BADSITES proposal in its current form does not appear to have
consensus among either Wikpedians as a whole or admins in particular.

Are those who oppose Gracenotes going to now try and get admins who
disagree with BADSITES desysopped as well?

For that matter, I disagree with the wholly absolutist BADSITES
proposal as it currently stands.  Are they going to try and get me
removed from the arbcom because of that?

I believe there IS reasonable consensus for a saner policy in this
area, but not this.

-Matt