[WikiEN-l] Harassment sites

[Ray Saintonge]

Will Beback wrote:
> My proposal is considerably different from "WP:BADSITES". I'm not sure 
> why folks continue to use that term to describe every single proposal 
> advanced to resolve this problem, but it may not be the most helpful 
> plain of engagement. I dub this proposal "WP:COISITES" because it covers 
> self-published websites that have a conflict of interest with Wikipedia 
> due to their attempts to coerce WP editors.
>
> Here is a formulation:
> "WP:COISITES: Self-published sources, such as blogs, forums, and open 
> wikis, that are actively engaged in lawsuits or harassment of Wikipedia 
> or its editors are not reliable sources [unless proven otherwise] and 
> should not be used as a source or external link in articles."
>
> That text excludes non-self published sources, like the ''New Yorker''. 
> It allows for some flexibility in special cases. It doesn't deal with 
> non-article space links at all. Further language would be needed to 
> define "harassment", and to map out dispute resolution procedures.
>
> What's missing or in error from that proposal?
What's missing is that "harassment" is not defined first.  You seek to 
define a response before you define the crime. "Actively engaged in 
lawsuits" may be easier to define if you insist on a link to the court 
registry where the suit is actually filed.

It would be inappropriate to call something harassment without this.  We 
have too many people who are too quick to characterize any form of 
criticism as harassment, and who would go so far as to obliterate all 
evidence of the criticism so as to limit any kind of independent 
evaluation.  In a regular legal system that might be called obstruction 
of justice.

Renaming the proposal is nothing more than a diversion into the 
trivial.  If there is a consensus about the substance we can name it 
anything we want.
  For that matter muddling this with Conflicts of Interest diminishes 
the broader nature of conflicts of interest.  A person who insists on 
putting his own company into a good light may be in a conflict of 
interest, but not with Wikipedia.

Ec