[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[Slim Virgin]

On 5/30/07, Sheldon Rampton <sheldon at prwatch.org> wrote:

> We've already seen Slim Virgin put forward the following argument:
>
> > The problem with that, Joe, is that some members of the "community"
> > who've been particularly vocal on the linking issue are regular
> > posters to Wikipedia Review.
>
> Note the assumptions here ...
>
> (1) Someone who merely posts comments on the censored website is
> automatically presumed to be behaving inappropriately. Following my
> analogy, that's the equivalent of "You shouldn't vote for Jimmy
> Carter because he gave an interview to Playboy magazine."
>
> (2) Such individuals are not true members of the Wikipedia community.
> They're members of the "community" in quote marks ...
>
> By trapping people in this loop of hate speech, you divide the world
> up into decent versus indecent people ...

Sheldon, I take your point and respect your argument, but please watch
the rhetoric. The hate speech is on the sites we're trying to deal
with. You can disagree and say we're not dealing with it correctly,
but don't try to turn dealing with hate speech as just another example
of it.

I do think that people who post supportively to Wikipedia Review *and*
(note the "and" in case you misinterpret what I'm saying) who join in
the attempt to attack and out individual editors, are arguably not
members of the Wikipedia community. I know you'll say that I'm making
this a matter of definition, and that it's just my definition, and
you'd be right on both scores. But every single description that I've
ever read of the word "Wikipedian" precludes that kind of behavior. If
that's no longer true, heaven help us.

Sarah