Bod Notbod wrote: > Well, I guess I just don't know where this conversation is going. > > A paedophile might know a lot about the Spanish Civil War and could > usefully add stuff. > > A murderer might know a lot about Pokemon. > > A rapist might know a lot about physics. > > It's not like we're going to know the personality involved, so surely > we just have to accept that editors come in all shapes and sizes and > let them get on with it.
I agree. When users edit the wikis to reflect pro-pedophilia/pro-murder/pro-rape/pro-anything (or anti-anything) agendas, that's when it's appropriate to act (regardless of whether they've provided advance indication that such an issue might arise). There's a world of difference between the block rationale "you edited badly" and the block rationale "you didn't edit badly, but you're a bad person." We stand to draw more negative attention to ourselves by deeming certain people "bad" than by allowing said users to edit under the same rules as everyone else. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
