QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 23rd May 2009, 2:44pm)
Yes lucky old David Boothroyd AKA as Wikipedia User Sam Blacketer, User Fys, User Dbiv and User David Boothroyd, was having his privacy protected by
his chums.
Now if only other marginal BLP's could be so well cared for.
When is somebody going to mention on WP that having a BLP up on WP AND using your own name as username, doesn't allow you to use 3 other accounts, at least one of them a sock at the same time? For example: User:Fys doesn't exactly say "Unblocking user:Dbiv (my alternatve account)", now does he? That would be an edit dif comment we'd like to see.
As with the Weiss/Mantanmoreland case we're about to see much gaming of the system, carried on under the idea that is was necessary to protect the editor's privacy. And of course this will be used as a weapon against all anti-gamers. (IMG:
smilys0b23ax56/default/yecch.gif)
QUOTE(One @ Sat 23rd May 2009, 3:37pm)
QUOTE(RMHED @ Sat 23rd May 2009, 9:44pm)
Yes lucky old David Boothroyd AKA as Wikipedia User Sam Blacketer, User Fys, User Dbiv and User David Boothroyd, was having his privacy protected by
his chums.
Now if only other marginal BLP's could be so well cared for.
They sort of are: BLPs can be deleted if the subjects ask for the dramatic force of the site on them.
Meaning what?
QUOTE
The problem is that they have to raise their profile to do this. It would be better if these were routine.
There's an understatement. It would be nice with wikiadmins had to put up with the same BLP crap that everyone does. But of course they don't. If they later become admins, then they game the system and maybe get a BLP deleted without anybody making the connection. Or not. If they get outed at WR first, well, then they get what they want, but not in the way they wanted it.