[WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

Sat Sep 3 05:51:42 UTC 2005

Though Ive had little interest in particularly normal
cases, I read a bunch of the Skyring ruling. The
Arbcom decision seems a bit rash --to foff off some
lucky punter for a year just for a little rudish
pov-warring? 

Yeah Skyring was pov-pushing, and ban on certain
articles is indeed justified. But a complete ban for a
full year? While others are simply "admonished"? Duffy
and Carr arent exactly known for their perennial and
soothing pleasantness, (Uncle Ed?) so that leaves
critical thinkers like myself to wonder what the
actual deal is. I suppose its just to clamp down on
sockpuppetry and send a message.

Is "no wiki-stalking" even a policy? Cause thats what
people seem to do all around anyway. Skyring seems to
have a basis for some review of the latest ruling,
though I suppose people will want him to demonstrate
patience and heed to the rules. (In spite of WP:IAR,
no doubt). Was something else going on there, or did
he just kind of rub people the wrong way by being a
pov-pushing smart alec?

SV

--- Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:

> I would have a hard time using this to justify the
> publication of 
> someone's personal information on Wikipedia.  If it
> were some serious 
> alleged crime, such as death threats, perhaps that
> would be warranted, 
> but evading a ban doesn't rise to the level where I
> would be comfortable 
> "outing" people.  At least during the period when I
> was on the ArbCom, 
> when we used evidence of people's real identies or
> even IPs to ban 
> sockpuppets and reincarnations, we didn't publish
> that evidence publicly 
> on the wiki.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 