[WikiEN-l] Another "BADSITES" controversy

[The Mangoe]

On 5/30/07, jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Back in the real world, someone claimed that links to sites like WR
> could benefit Wikipedia. I challenged him to provide examples of how
> they could do so. What followed was a paucity of actual examples, but
> an increasingly enraged set of posts, insisting that Wikipedia was
> being damaged, people were being censored, babies being murdered, etc.

It has been pointed out from the very beginning of this, back in the
first week of April, that one of the links that was erased was in the
Expert Retention article, citing a quotation from that very site. This
has been pointed out over and over and over. Perhaps you want to
disparage that too-- plenty of people have been willing to, as the
whole anti-credential episode made abundantly clear-- but the evidence
remains.

> > If, on the other hand, you can't prove in a court of law that
> > Wikipedia Review has actually done something illegal, you should just
> > grow a thicker skin.

> I think you are somehow imagining that the stuff WR writes about me
> actually upsets me.

Actually, I think it does bother you, or else you wouldn't attack me
so for posting on it. But if it isn't really bothering anyone, then
who cares?