We should use whatever is worth using no matter where it appears, and link to whatever is worth linking to no matter where.
The concern is in drawing additional attention to sites that are harmful overall. But, as with all such attempts, our attempt to deny the links has attracted more attention than the links would have. If those sites are our enemies, we have provided them with the perfect material to make us appear ridiculous. The normal response of an outsider seeing the discussion will be to try to find the actual attack pages, and thus we are adding yet more to the harm they do.
This will always be the case with a free speech environment. Whatever the harm may be from further publicity, we cannot prevent it, and anything we now do will only add to it. We are letting them destroy us. All further attempts to eliminate links to non-harmful pages on these sites will strengthen the sites yet more.
SV does present us with a serious problem, but there is no solution for it. Adopting her proposed solution will make her problem worse--she may be too close to it to consider it objectively. It is understandable to hope for a remedy, but the only way of deflecting interest from the old is the inevitable appearance of new.
DGG David Goodman
On 5/29/07, Slim Virgin slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/29/07, Joe Szilagyi szilagyi@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/29/07, Slim Virgin slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. Ken, that's what we've been arguing from the start. No links to purpose-built attack sites, the ones that do little else.
Isn't that limited really to just one website (that I know of, without naming names) unarguably, and two that people are pretty regularly arguing the point over?
I can think of five, and there's a webpage associated with one of them, so that's six.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l