Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-24894325-20191015155744

Since I actually have a lot of points to make and have already provided a lot of facts not previously discussed in either of two threads, I will ask whether anybody else would prefer to return to discussing the "one-sided" decision by three admin to delete the stories after TheChampionOfTime took an even more one-sided and, to the best of my knowledge, unilateral decision to create pages for them without an inclusion debate. Is that what the community would prefer to focus on right now, on reappointing the blame and rediscussing the past? Or should we continue discussing validity as of right now.

As a reminder, due to actions of James Wylder in the course of the first debate, the situation now is materially different from the situation when the stories were deleted. At that point, the stories were posted on a personal blog of James Wylder that lacked a legal statement or any other hallmarks of a commercial website of a professional publisher. Since then, James Wylder added a legal statement to that website. His original legal statement was criticised in the first debate for being, shall we say, too imprecise and not sufficiently lawyerly, and was consequently updated.

Now we have a situation when stories are posted on a website that at least has a legal statement. Because of this material change I cannot use some of the arguments that caused the deletion.

I will wait for more voices in favour of revisiting the past before actually doing so.