[WikiEN-l] A new solution for the BLP dilemma

[wjhonson at aol.com]

-----Original Message-----
From: Durova <nadezhda.durova at gmail.com>
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 3:54 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] A new solution for the BLP dilemma

It is to be hoped that Wikipedians can hold a mailing list conversation
without inflicting further unwarranted damage upon the reputation of a
living person.  In fact the copyvio YouTube hostings were upheld as 
such at
arbitration enforcement, and resulted in topic bans for two editors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Arbitration_enforcement/Archive18#Matt_Sanchez

That decision withstood scrutiny including an appeal directly to ArbCom
itself.  Nobody wikilawyered to achieve that outcome, and nobody 
suppressed
anything.  In fact, the appeal to AE was delayed a month to give time to
obtain transcripts.  AE was a last resort after offers of BLPN and RSN 
were
refused.  The requesting post at AE only only asked for removal of the
violating material, and an uninvolved administrator stepped forward to 
topic
ban.

So far, no evidence has been forthcoming that the biography subject
manipulated Wikipedia to seek attention.  If anyone on this list has
evidence that he did, please do not reply here but send it to ArbCom 
and cc
me.  If the evidence is credible I will terminate mentorship and the
Committee will take appropriate actions.

-Lise>>

-------------------------

I'm glad that you acknowledge that you are or were mentoring this 
subject.  It's good to have the facts laid on the table.

I still fail to see why you, who don't want to "inflict further damage" 
bring this subject up, yet again.  If by further damage, you mean, 
re-report what credible sources state, then there is no way to come to 
any agreement.

ArbCom did not "uphold copyright violation" because there was no 
copyright violation.  No person, holding copyright, ever complained 
about anything.  What occurred was simply silence.  The owner of the 
copyright has not now, nor ever had any problem with the audio being 
hosted from the radio program.

That is not "upholding" anything.  Silence is not uncharacteristic of a 
situation where experienced editors, including admins, fought with 
vicious tools to silence any objections *before* the committee even 
reviewed the situation.

The Matt Sanchez fiasco was quite possibly one of the most outrageous 
abuses of Wikipower I've ever encountered in my years in the project.  
A few people with power effectively suppressed and silenced editors who 
were attempting to reach and had reached compromise language.  The 
suppression was accomplished by back-door private emailings in which 
particular editors were singled out to be harassed off the project, and 
this was done by persons who had the power to effect their goal.

If you don't want to "inflict more damage" than I suggest you drop it 
and move on.  Your memory of what occurred and mine are evidently quite 
remote from one another.

Are you willing to drop it?