[WikiEN-l] A BADSITES RfA piling-on

[Slim Virgin]

On 5/28/07, Phil Sandifer <Snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On May 28, 2007, at 5:34 PM, Slim Virgin wrote:
>
> > On 5/28/07, Blu Aardvark <jeffrey.latham at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Admins have no obligation to protect other editors.
> >
> > 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?
>
It's unfair to keep on mentioning that RfA because the candidate's not
here to defend himself, but on the other hand, I'm reluctant to let
some of these comments stand. Gracenotes's replies about this and
other issues worried me because they seemed evasive. For example: "I
suppose you mean attack sites as those in which personal attacks are
made against Wikipedians, without the intent of improving Wikipedia."
That set off alarm bells for me, because *all* these attack sites
claim to have the intent of improving WP.