[WikiEN-l] further response to Erik

While we are at it, I suppose that now, Erik, you also reject the old edit war you were engaged in on the Bomis article as to whether it was pornography: _http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bomis&diff=32643882&oldi… (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bomis&diff=32643882&oldid…) is just one example _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bomis#Links_to_archived_Bomis_inactive_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bomis#Links_to_archived_Bomis_inactive) I find this quote from you in the following section especially telling of a sudden change in tone: "First, as I've said to you, this is about documenting the history of _Bomis_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomis) truthfully, follwing the NPOV and not using euphemisms. Due to Wikipedia's affiliation with Bomis, Wikipedians' loyalty to Jimmy Wales, and the press interest in this history, it is easy to violate our most sacred policies when dealing with this topic. I must encourage all contributors to edit these articles with our policies in mind. There are no special exceptions to NPOV." Oversight, anyone? **************It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)