[WikiEN-l] Delete Daniel Brandt

Mon Jun 12 12:59:54 UTC 2006

Phil Sandifer wrote:
> 
> But, after thinking about it, its my belief that the Foundation owes  
> its editors and admins the protections it can give. And one of those  
> is offering to delete Brandt's article in exchange for the removal of  
> the Hive Mind site. It's an awful trade. It's a horrible, awful  
> trade. We should hate making it, and we should hate Brandt for  
> forcing us to make it.

There may in fact be reasons to delete Brandt's article.  And it's just 
barely conceivable that Brandt, either as part of an exchange or because 
he genuinely believes his grievances have been addressed, might take 
down the Hive Mind.

But don't think for a moment either of those is going to stay deleted. 
Can you say "Wikitruth"?

The fact is, the more popular Wikipedia gets the more it becomes a 
target.  And being an administrator on Wikipedia automatically makes you 
part of the target.  I _really_ hate to say this, but the only way to 
escape the spotlight that has any chance of working, short of shutting 
down the site entirely, is to personally dissociate yourself from it.

This means contacting a steward and asking for a voluntary desysoping.

(And if someone here does wish to take that route, it's probably better 
to do so _before_ some kook forces you to do it.  At the very least, 
let's _not_ have a Signpost article saying "X asked to be desysoped 
citing threats made by Y."  That's just begging for copycats.)

We didn't ask our admins whether they wanted to be targets.  But we 
can't make them not be targets, not as long as we're running one of the 
most popular sites in the world.  In some cases, the best we can do may 
be to offer them a way out.

(However, I do believe there are situations where we can do more than 
than, and I heartily endorse your suggestion of a Foundation-managed 
user protection fund.)

-- 
Ilmari Karonen