On 10 Nov 2007 at 16:37:33 +0000, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
Fact is, I am getting just a little bit tired of the fact that some people give a very strong appearance of extending a greater assumption of good faith towards the likes of Bagley and Barber than they do towards those of us who work to protect the project form the pernicious influence of such people.
And Senator McCarthy, I'm sure, was tired of the fact that some people seemed to be extending more assumptions of good faith towards the communists than towards those like the Senator who worked to protect the country from their pernicious influence. Nevertheless, even if it caused one to be categorized as a communist sympathizer for saying so (and even if many of the people saying so *were* in fact sympathizers of communist ideology), it was in fact true that the actions taken by the likes of the Senator in the name of protecting the American system against communism were in fact undermining some important things about the American system such as freedom to hold and express opinions.
Which does not change the fact that I do believe, and I am perfectly happy to stand up and be counted on this, that active participation on Wikipedia Review, as it is *right now*, is fundamentally incompatible with being a good Wikipedian.
And I believe that the whole Alkivar business proves this.
I looked over some of the pages in that case, and saw no mention of Wikipedia Review except where you brought it up yourself.
Nobody else has to agree with this, it's not a proposed policy, but it is a statement of how I feel about that site *right now* based on what its prominent members are doing *right now*.
You have a right to your own feelings, as do I to mine, and I hope nobody has to live in fear of any "banhammer" for holding them.