[WikiEN-l] Abuse of your services

Fri May 6 17:53:39 UTC 2005

Well, I might consider reporting the accusation of sluttery if (a) there was 
a vast amount of evidence that the person was behaving in a way that could 
generally be construed as sluttish; and (b) if the person came onto our 
mailing list, proved themselves a slut, and insisted we not call them that. 

Not likely.

However, alleged sluts have, apparently, more discretion and common sense 
then alleged kooks.

On 5/6/05, slimvirgin at gmail.com <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5/6/05, Josh Gordon <joshua.p.gordon at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think it's us who the bullies are here. The alleged kook has 
> been
> > bullying people on usenet for many years; his legal threats are an 
> example
> > of that. If we had an article [[Abusive usenet contributors]], he'd be
> > pretty close to the top of the list.
> 
> Josh, we're not supposed to use Usenet as a source except for material
> about itself. This is like using Stormfront as a source for an article
> about itself (which we can do), then mentioning that they give out an
> award for Jewish Supremacist of the Year, and adding the real name of
> this year's winner - a private individual, who's been given the award
> because he's been harassing Stormfront. And when that person writes to
> us and asks that we remove his name from the Stormfront article, and
> explains that he was only given the award because he's been making a
> nuisance of himself with Stormfront, we ridicule him, we protect the
> article so he can't remove his name, and then we threaten to ban him!
> 
> The bottom line is that Usenet can only be used as a source of
> information *about itself* because it does not count as a reputable,
> credible, or authoritative source, and while the Kook of the Year
> reference is about Usenet, the name of the complainant is not. He is a
> private, non-notable individual, except in Usenet terms, where he has
> achieved notability, but we are *not allowed to use Usenet as a source
> for the claim of notability*, because in so doing, we're using Usenet
> as a secondary source, which is not allowed under [[Wikipedia:No
> original research]]. So we have admins violating core policy here in
> order to keep this non-notable man's name in a silly article about a
> silly subject, even though he's asked us to remove it and has said it
> could harm his business.
> 
> Mperel made a good point about this elsewhere: "So does this mean you
> would support listing the name of high school girls awarded the name
> "slut" by their male peers under the respective high school articles,
> since it would simply be reporting the verifiable fact that boys at
> high school xyz have called girl abc a "slut"?" --MPerel
> 
> Sarah
>