[WikiEN-l] Ban notices, Wikipedia, and search engines.

[William Pietri]

Magnus Manske wrote:
> Stopping vandals isn't attacking, it's defending against an attack.
>
> Saying the vandals are right to attack /again/ through the infamous
> "attack sites" is OK since the poor vandals are the victims is ...
> (sorry, I'm not a native speaker of English, so I lack the words to
> express just how perverse that is).
>   


I don't think AB is saying it's "OK" in the sense of morally justified, 
or that they are pure victims.

I think the point is that we shouldn't be surprised if they attack again 
when they feel victimized.


That seems reasonable to me. History is full of situations where 
tit-for-tat retaliations escalate conflicts, with both sides feeling 
that their actions are either morally right or excusable given the 
provocation of the other side. I don't see anything that would make us 
immune from that dynamic.

William



-- 
William Pietri <william at scissor.com>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:William_Pietri