On 10/17/07, joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
Quoting John Lee johnleemk@gmail.com:
On 10/17/07, joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
15.1) Wikipedia should not link to websites set up for the purpose of
or
substantially devoted to harassing its volunteers. Harassment in this
context
refers to cyber-stalking, offline stalking, outing people without
their
consent, humiliating them sexually, or threatening them with physical violence.
I'm very worried that this proposal doesn't make any distinction between article space and non-article space.
I'm very worried that this means I can't link to an attack site to make
fun
of it, as I did with Brandft's hive mind. (I was listed on it, so I
thought
it'd make a good userbox joke - gosh, I feel so old.) This makes no distinction between intent and actual action - [[mens rea]] for the
legal
nerds out there. In real life, the law sometimes cannot draw a good distinction between intent and the act itself, but in Wikipedia, we
usually
can. We should be banning the usage of links for the express purpose of harassing or outing editors; not banning links which *might* conceivably
be
used in a context to harass editors simply because of their content.
I'm inclined to agree. I forgot also that we had fun little threads occasionally when people got stuck on Hivemind. JzG announced his placement on Hivemind. However, an occasional humorous thread being curtailed seems like a minor price to pay.
Indeed - rather, I meant that as a humorous example. Now it appears we cannot even discuss these sites on-wiki - or at the very least, can't hyperlink URLs to them. And, of course, eventually there will be a notable site devoted to attacking Wikipedians, at which point, we will have to re-examine this policy.
Johnleemk