[WikiEN-l] A BADSITES RfA piling-on

[Gallagher Mark George]

G'day Ken,

> On Wed, 30 May 2007, John Lee wrote:
> > On the other hand, we have firm criteria for what would be an 
> attack site -
> > a site devoted to outing the identities of anonymous 
> Wikipedians, or a site
> > devoted to libeling Wikipedia editors is unambiguously such a site.
> 
> The Tersa Nielsen Hayden situation pretty much demonstrates that 
> the attack
> site criteria are not firm or unambiguous.

No, it doesn't.  Here, I'll resolve that question now:

Teresa Nielsen-Hayden's weblog is unambiguously *not* an attack
site.  Will Beback suffered a momentary lapse of reason, and
he seriously fucked up in a way that should cause him to blush
continously for the next two weeks.

Where's the controversy?


(I'm far from being on the side of the BADSITES people in this debate,
but when you say something moronic, I can't agree with it.)


-- 
[[User:MarkGallagher]]