Board Thread:Inclusion debates/@comment-31010985-20190928203157/@comment-30881616-20191004155036

I do believe this does highlight how most unfortunate for us the doxxing issues in the last thread has been, for the wiki’s credibility and transparency—however necessarily it had been to completely delete the last thread as an emergency measure, it is certainly a fact that there is a whole body of pertinent points and evidence which, to quote from post #9 above, now “there is no record of.” That this is not ideal is, of course, obvious: take Tardis:Forum policy, for example. There is a clause warning against “[violating] our rule against disrupting the wiki by making the same point in several different places — particularly one that has been defeated by the community”—it is there on the page, bright as day. But how can the wiki enforce it if, say, the bunk of these “several different places” have been deleted for some unrelated reasons? Does the offender now have carte blanche to make the same already-defeated point again and again?

And more to the point, am I participating in a discussion that will set precedent for such flagrant rule-breaking for the future? Because I would rather not be a party to such a thing, if nobody minds.

The administration of this wiki should be above suspicion—surely that is an ideal that everyone can agree to? Or if someone here objects, and thinks that the administration of this wiki should not be above suspicion, please make that case and let me know. And if anyone is wondering: no, this is not a personal attack; I would make the same point even if one of our admins had not just been involved in a doxxing scandal.

But yes, as it happens, it is a fact that one of our admins has indeed just been involved in a doxxing scandal.

And sure, to err is human—I do make mistakes myself, so who am I to throw stones? But is it not also human to desire some sense of security? To have some comforting assurance that the people one is talking to are engaging in the discussion in good faith, that evidence does not just disappear into thin air, that people will have to take responsibility for what they said, and not pretend they had never said it?

For the record, I am not an admin. I have never claimed to be one, and indeed many aspects of wiki administration are strange and alien to me. (For example, I am not quite sure why the previous thread had to be permanently deleted—rather than, say, just deleting the “doxxing” post, and having the rest of the old thread available as evidence, until this new thread has reached a conclusion and the old one can be safely deleted. I am sure one of the admins can enlighten me on that point, of course.) Nevertheless, I do think my suggestion here is fair, and reasonable, and would help this discussion smoothly go forward in a way that is compliant to the letters and spirit of our policies:

Please, User:Shambala108 or any of the other admins, could any of you please kindly clarify—are such things as screenshots or the like of the previous thread be admissible into evidence? With all sensitive personal information censored, of course—which should not be too much of a problem, since as far as I can recall the quote-unquote “doxxing” behaviours was limited in origin, and are not representative of the tone and tenor of the thread as a whole.