On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Dan Rosenthal <swatjes...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Nov 29, 2009, at 2:02 PM, Anthony wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: >>> Neo-Nazis are frequently banned for >>> disruptive editing as are many other aggressive POV pushers. >> >> "All IP addresses owned or operated by the Church of Scientology and >> its associates, broadly interpreted, are to be blocked as if they were >> open proxies." >> >> Is that still in effect? If so, whatever slippery slope there is, has >> already been begun. > > The obvious difference here being this was a ban of IP addresses owned by a > particular organization, > not the people behind it
I guess I've interpreted "its associates, broadly interpreted" too broadly :). Seriously, how is "its associates, broadly interpreted" supposed to be interpreted? In any case, yes, there's a difference. But there's always a difference between the beginning of a slippery slope and the end of it. That's the whole point of a slippery slope. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
