3 ms·

I really am more concerned with the threat to call him out. While I may not agree with all his actions this idea that we can strip someone of the anonymity that

I really am more concerned with the threat to call him out. While I may not agree with all his actions this idea that we can strip someone of the anonymity that makes wikipedia great because we don't agree with him is something we should all stand against. if you have to ask why, then it is as simple as understanding that yourself or editors you do like could find themselves silenced because it will bring threats

manfredsteiner 8y ago
well, I'm grateful for some of the sense in this forum. i know PC and he's one. that's it - the end of the story. but some of these twitter and blog trolls don't care about real-life consequences. I agree with Shivetya that protecting the right to anonymity - particularly in thsi vile manhunt - should be paramount. i think PC is probably experiencing a lot of stress and would welcome some more solidarity around this. twitter has been rife with speculation, people post addresses on forums, someone even posted a death threat on craig murrays blog in the comments today... i mean , come on... anyone got any suggestiosn how to handle this and de-escalate? it seems totally unwarranted (as you say, he's prolific but not even in the top 300), and is getting really serious... :(
- craigmurray 8y ago
  It wasn't a death threat and was posted by a septuagenarian lady. I agree it was a bit tasteless so I removed it 24 hours ago. A ridiculous point that, even were it true, in no way answers the point of systematic extreme bias in Cross's edits. You want examples? How about his removing the fact that right wing ex-Telegraph and ex-Murdoch BBC journalist Emma Barnett' parents were brothel keepers, as widely reported in MSM (and relevant as it paid for her private school and university) while adding in to my entry a Mail claim that my own wife was a stripper.
gozilla65 8y ago
Do you seriously think Philip Cross is an actual individual ? Personally I think it a plainly obvious that it is well organised, probably well funded PR operation. Which is perfectly fine by me (I'm certainly not as naive as to think that such things are not happening for years). What is IMHO more worrying is the apparent collusion of Wikipedia, as an organisation, with those people. M. Wales is entitled to his political opinions and water works for stuffing his wallet, but he is also walking a very very fine line...

manfredsteiner 8y ago

well, I'm grateful for some of the sense in this forum. i know PC and he's one. that's it - the end of the story. but some of these twitter and blog trolls don't care about real-life consequences. I agree with Shivetya that protecting the right to anonymity - particularly in thsi vile manhunt - should be paramount. i think PC is probably experiencing a lot of stress and would welcome some more solidarity around this. twitter has been rife with speculation, people post addresses on forums, someone even posted a death threat on craig murrays blog in the comments today... i mean , come on... anyone got any suggestiosn how to handle this and de-escalate? it seems totally unwarranted (as you say, he's prolific but not even in the top 300), and is getting really serious... :(

craigmurray 8y ago
It wasn't a death threat and was posted by a septuagenarian lady. I agree it was a bit tasteless so I removed it 24 hours ago. A ridiculous point that, even were it true, in no way answers the point of systematic extreme bias in Cross's edits. You want examples? How about his removing the fact that right wing ex-Telegraph and ex-Murdoch BBC journalist Emma Barnett' parents were brothel keepers, as widely reported in MSM (and relevant as it paid for her private school and university) while adding in to my entry a Mail claim that my own wife was a stripper.

gozilla65 8y ago

Do you seriously think Philip Cross is an actual individual ? Personally I think it a plainly obvious that it is well organised, probably well funded PR operation. Which is perfectly fine by me (I'm certainly not as naive as to think that such things are not happening for years). What is IMHO more worrying is the apparent collusion of Wikipedia, as an organisation, with those people. M. Wales is entitled to his political opinions and water works for stuffing his wallet, but he is also walking a very very fine line...