Nowhere to hide, libel not covered by 1st Options

[lilburne]

Court orders hand over of identity of anonymous wikipedia editors.

http://lawkipedia.com/social-networking/id...-amendment.html

libel not covered by 1st - apparently.

[victim of censorship]

Court orders hand over of identity of anonymous wikipedia editors.

http://lawkipedia.com/social-networking/id...-amendment.html

libel not covered by 1st - apparently.

So old wisdom from one our own at WR...

(Milton Roe @ Thu 22nd October 2009, 5:18pm) *
One day, some incident is going to rip through WP like an asteroid, and everybody that has anything to do with the project, is going to be completely and totally surprised at the depth of the anger unleashed.

Given that WP doesn't embrace the concept or practice of due process, the haphazard and frequent episodes of injustice (up to and including the hoary and recurring Scapegoat Drama) are a predictable source of the reactive anger that Milton anticipates.

Eventually that cumulative anger will boil over in a dramatic and cataclysmic paroxysm that will make the front pages of the mainstream press.

And Wikipedia will go up in smoke.
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&sh...ndpost&p=201201

[lilburne]

Court orders hand over of identity of anonymous wikipedia editors.

http://lawkipedia.com/social-networking/id...-amendment.html

libel not covered by 1st - apparently.

So old wisdom from one our own at WR...

I suspect that in some circumstances, AFD debates, talk page discussions, and other venues will also be examined. Plaintiff: "When I complained and tried to remove the libel I was blocked, and banned. When I created a new account to complain I was again blocked and labelled a 'sockpuppet master' a term of opprobrium on the site. When it was proposed that the article be deleted 20 other members insisted that the libel be kept." etc, etc.