QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 9th May 2008, 1:56am)
QUOTE(Cla68 @ Thu 8th May 2008, 8:43pm)
For the record, earlier in this thread I wasn't threatening to out anyone. I was commenting on the fact that at least one press representative was aware of this situation. If he or any other journalist decides to write an article on this group of POV-pushers and their antics in Wikipedia, I don't think that the reporter would find it too difficult to learn of their real names.
Right - I believe the post you're referring to is
this one, but Moulton wrote it, and it was more than two sentences... So the chances that they read all the way down to the part where he mentions Brian Bergstein are probably nil.
Moulton, of course, has never made any secret of his support for the idea of having all WP editors, or at least those who edit BLP's, be identifiable. Cla68, on the other hand, has never (to my knowledge) expressed support for such an idea... Am I right, Mr. Cla?
Well, I guess since my name has been in the press linked to my userpage, I feel the point is moot since I'm outed. But, I know that's kind of a cop-out because I don't have my name on my Wikipedia userpage. I've been thinking about it lately, especially after that late night (for me) conversation I had in another thread about BLPs and Brandt. I avoided making edits to a BLP that I was reading about in the newspaper (about a 19-year old US Army medic who earned the Silver Star in Afghanistan) today for this reason.
I haven't decided for sure yet, but I think requiring identifiable editors only to be able to edit BLPs is probably a good idea.