User talk:Banned Alt

Open letter

A board member has added "inappropriate personal information" to the list of serious block reasons. That same member has also banned one or more users for posting archives of Sarah Nyberg's ffshrine website. However, statements such as "stop protecting a man who's so abusive he formed a 4chan raid to get back at his ex" and "he's still a sociopath who thought spurring a 4chan raid is the perfect way to get over a bad breakup so maybe that's why he's being psychoanalyzed" as well as a claim that "Milo Yiannopoulos admits that he publishes libel" on Sarah Nyberg go unchallenged. So RationalWiki has demonstrated that publishing false accusations are acceptable, but exposing misdoing by The Right Sort is not.--Banned Alt (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I guess you mean this? (a link would have been helpful). If so, that was not added by a board member. I am sure I do not need to list the number of logical fallacies in your post but, really, none of the points you make have anything to do with the efficacy of the recent addition to the block policy. Your points about various Gamergate related issues might or might not be valid (don't really care as I have no interest in that enormous bore-fest) but they are for sure irrelevant. If on the other hand you are referring to something else, please post a link. --TheroadtoWiganPier (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

"Inappropriate personal information" was first added by David Gerard. All of the revdels and blocks that followed were over archived chatlogs from ffshrine which contained statements by Sarah Nyberg. David revdelled said archives then falsely claimed Milo and Breitbart admitted to libel. So false accusations are not a bannable offense by RW's standards but posting incriminating chatlogs are. In short, lying is good, truth is bad. In reality, of course, it's not about that but protecting a certain group.--Banned Alt (talk) 19:18, 6 January 2016 (UTC)