[WikiEN-l] What BADSITES boils down to

[David Gerard]

On 31/05/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/30/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 31/05/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:

> > > "Damaging the articles and Wikipedia"?

> > How would you characterise the removal of all links to
> > nielsenhayden.com from encyclopedia articles? I'd certainly call that
> > an accurate description of the result.

> Will has apologized for that and has said he overreacted at the shock
> of seeing his name on the site. It has now been taken down. That kind
> of blog was never part of the ArbCom's definition of an "attack site,"
> and the speed with which the owner removed the name shows that it's a
> responsible site.


However:

1. he sincerely blocked it at the time as an attack site.
2. BADSITES was always a ridiculous expansion of the ArbCom ruling.
3. As were all the people who act like it while denying its name.

The point remains: letting the idea that some sites must have all
mention removed from Wikipedia *leads directly to damaging the
encyclopedia*, because *in practice* people can't be trusted not to
have attacks of stupid over it.


- d.