[WikiEN-l] Is Slate an attack site?

[Gregory Maxwell]

On 10/11/07, William Pietri <william at scissor.com> wrote:
> Fred, your response here is exactly the reason I think we shouldn't have
> a BADSITES policy, even the unwritten one we seem to have ended up with.
[snip]
> No serious Wikipedia participant is interested in exposing anonymous
> editors for thrills, or supporting the barking loons that latch on to
> Wikipedia as the source of all their troubles. By trying ever harder to
> keep anybody anywhere from talking about SV, you and others have
> convinced a lot of people that no information-suppression policy could
> ever work. By overreaching so dramatically, I believe you have reduced
> your ability to protect other anonymous editors. And that's a shame.

Thank you for your post William, I think you were very clearly stated
and a beacon of reason in these muddy waters.

Your concern was also very right: In the future when I see an effort
to cover something up the current arbcom I'll be likely to distrust
and investigate further because it's been demonstrated that the
involved parties lack the good judgement to wield the power to
suppress.

So far I've seen people attacked for attempting reasonable criticism
or for even asking reasonable questions. Meanwhile the actual trolls
are having more fun than ever because the actions of some of our
leadership are giving people cause to reconsider their past dismissal
of the claims that we're a bunch of cliquish manipulative censors.