[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[William Pietri]

Slim Virgin wrote:
> BADSITES had existed in spirit for about 18 months and had been
> practised without fuss for the most part. [...]
> Any rule applied without common sense is going to get a bad name --
> but as you say, it's the application that's at fault, not the basic
> idea. I'm arguing here against throwing the baby out with the
> bathwater.

Could somebody point me to the baby? I happily ignored most of the 
BADSITES thing the first time around, and I'm having trouble coming to 
grips with what people are actually proposing we do or not do.

 From SV's posts and others in this thread, I gather the core notion is 
that we should not aid off-Wikipedia attacks on particular Wikipedians 
by drawing unnecessary attention to them by direct linking. And that 
further, there exist sites that are mainly attacks on Wikipedians, and 
so our presumption should be that any link to that site is probably 
aiding an attack. However, we should strive to use good judgment, rather 
than applying rules mechanistically. Is that a fair statement? And is 
that laid out somewhere on Wikipedia?

On the other side, Daniel Tobias's essay seems to be the closest thing 
I've found on-wiki to an opposing view. That was helpful, but is there a 
more direct statement of the proposed policy alternative?

Thanks,

William