ARBCOM Badsites, This is what they're saying about us ... Options Rating

[the fieryangel]

JzG is still upset about being called sexist (maybe you'll shut your mouth the next time, Guy?), but they also have quite a lot to about WR : Here's our entry!

So, whatcha think???

[Daniel Brandt]

I hope FloNight is prepared to defend her failure to recuse herself. She seems determined to install wishy-washy language so as to give cabalists the power to kill links and references they don't like. What does "harass" mean? Did SlimVirgin harass me by starting that bio on me? Did I harass SlimVirgin by attempting to find out who was harassing me? If both answers are "yes," then who started this mess, SlimVirgin or me? Obviously, it was SlimVirgin who started it. Does that mean SlimVirgin should be blocked, and not me? Yep, that's how I see it.

Inappropriate application of policy

6) In a number of instances inappropriate attempts have been made to extend the principles of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO to sites merely critical of Wikipedia and its users' behavior. Those principles and those applied in this case apply only to malicious websites.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

2. We are clarifying existing policy that it is not incorrect to remove personal attacks and harassment. Links to external sites that harass our editors should not be made and can be removed. This does not apply to links to external sites that discuss Wikipedia in a critical manner. FloNight 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

3. Kirill 20:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Here's FloNight and her favorite word, "harassed," once again:

Other sites

6) A number of disputes regarding other sites are referenced at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Evidence. These may be considered if a Request for Arbitration limited to a particular dispute is made and accepted.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. Only as a last resort. I hope the community will come together and be more supportive of editors being harassed and ArbCom will not need to rule on every case. We need to encourage editors to focus on writing the encyclopedia and not engage in prolonged discussions about other editors. FloNight 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Abstain:

[Derktar]

I hope FloNight is prepared to defend her failure to recuse herself. She seems determined to install wishy-washy language so as to give cabalists the power to kill links and references they don't like. What does "harass" mean? Did SlimVirgin harass me by starting that bio on me? Did I harass SlimVirgin by attempting to find out who was harassing me? If both answers are "yes," then who started this mess, SlimVirgin or me? Obviously, it was SlimVirgin who started it. Does that mean SlimVirgin should be blocked, and not me? Yep, that's how I see it.

Inappropriate application of policy

6) In a number of instances inappropriate attempts have been made to extend the principles of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO to sites merely critical of Wikipedia and its users' behavior. Those principles and those applied in this case apply only to malicious websites.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

2. We are clarifying existing policy that it is not incorrect to remove personal attacks and harassment. Links to external sites that harass our editors should not be made and can be removed. This does not apply to links to external sites that discuss Wikipedia in a critical manner. FloNight 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

3. Kirill 20:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

Abstain:

Here's FloNight and her favorite word, "harassed," once again:

Other sites

6) A number of disputes regarding other sites are referenced at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Attack_sites/Evidence. These may be considered if a Request for Arbitration limited to a particular dispute is made and accepted.

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:33, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. Only as a last resort. I hope the community will come together and be more supportive of editors being harassed and ArbCom will not need to rule on every case. We need to encourage editors to focus on writing the encyclopedia and not engage in prolonged discussions about other editors. FloNight 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Abstain:

Dang you're right

Yes, doing this to harass is unacceptable. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, exposing users to more harassment by linking to attack sites is not acceptable. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

If a significant mission and scope of a web site and its content is to harass Wikipedians and does so in an extreme manner. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedians should support fellow Wikipedians by removing personal attacks, links to attack sites, and in extreme cases all reference to attack sites. In some situations, protecting a harassed user takes precedent over transparency. In extreme cases, removal of an article or content may be temporarily necessary to stop harassment. These cases are the exception not the rule. FloNight♥♥♥ 13:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, our intent is to deal with this extreme case of harassment not garden variety criticism that might be stated bluntly and unkindly. FloNight♥♥♥ 16:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, the sites attempt to harass Wikipedia editors by outing them and/or by presenting editors in a poor light by exaggerating errors, making false statement, or drawing false conclusions about an editors participation at Wikipedia. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Deliberate attempts to discredit and harass Wikipedia editors through exaggeration and drawing false conclusions. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

We are clarifying existing policy that it is not incorrect to remove personal attacks and harassment. Links to external sites that harass our editors should not be made and can be removed. This does not apply to links to external sites that discuss Wikipedia in a critical manner. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Remove first and discuss privately to see if the content can be added in a manner that does not harass and intimidate Wikipedia editors. FloNight♥♥♥ 14:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Only as a last resort. I hope the community will come together and be more supportive of editors being harassed and ArbCom will not need to rule on every case. We need to encourage editors to focus on writing the encyclopedia and not engage in prolonged discussions about other editors. FloNight♥♥♥ 17:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

12 instances of the h-word thus far.

It certainly is the buzzword of the hour.

[Kato]

Funnier are Fred Bauder's fire and brimstone pulpit proposals. Red faced and hoarse voiced, Fred screams...

6) In extreme cases, external attack sites which display MORAL DEPRAVITY!!!! In addition to removal of links to the site, references to it may also be removed.

....and on the subject of AntiSocialMedia.net, Fred bellows....

The focus of this case is an attack site, AntiSocialMedia.net, which displays MORAL DEPRAVITY!!!!

Hallelujah, sinners!

And now bring forth Saint Tobias, for he shall be cast into the den of lions.

[SqueakBox]

Funnier are Fred Bauder's fire and brimstone pulpit proposals. Red faced and hoarse voiced, Fred screams...

6) In extreme cases, external attack sites which display MORAL DEPRAVITY!!!! In addition to removal of links to the site, references to it may also be removed.

....and on the subject of AntiSocialMedia.net, Fred bellows....

The focus of this case is an attack site, AntiSocialMedia.net, which displays MORAL DEPRAVITY!!!!

Hallelujah, sinners!

And now bring forth Saint Tobias, for he shall be cast into the den of lions.

That's Fred for you. He called the pedophile purge "scorched earth policy" and if any of you saw his user page pic a few weeks ago he and his brother could both have been staright out of the old testament, see here, Squeak Box