[WikiEN-l] BADSITES ArbCom case about to close

[Rob Smith]

"David Gerard" wrote

>>* On 17/10/2007, charles.r.matthews at
ntlworld.com<http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>
*>* <charles.r.matthews at
ntlworld.com<http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>>
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.
*
>>* Is naming a site the same as linking? Note that in the example that
*>>* caused the case, antisocialmedia.net (which is undoubtedly an attack
*>>* site) was named, not linked, and its name has been in reliable sources
*>>* (under the interpretations pushed by the most prominent advocates of
*>>* BADSITES-like policies).
*
>Naming a site, alluding to a site, hinting at a site's existence: these are
not linking to a site. If naming is gaming this principle, then we should
treat it like other gaming. Gaming >harassment policy is typical of bullying
and provocative behaviour - back to the playground. In other works there is
a pretty good reason to say WP:HARASS is not for gaming.

>Charles


Question: What recourse does a living person like I have?  (1) I was
identified by real life identity on the Foundation list by an accuser. (2)
The accuser identified 4 attacks sites by name on the Evidence page, and a
fifth "a webpage run by [user name]." (3) The page I do maintain is copy
paste of WP discussion I did not participate in.

The sum total is, I become the target of attacks & retribution based upon
policy and consensus, not based upon anything I ever did, or any website I
am alleged to maintain.