Talk:RaceFail 09

Internal Links for Blog Post Titles

I thought it would be a good idea for each of the major blog posts (particularly those that have disappeared from the public Internet) to have its own page where we can call out highlights, important threads, and individual comments that sparked other discussions/posts, etc. That will keep the main timeline page pretty clear and straightforward. -KTempest

It's a good idea, though copyright restrictions may apply. --Pleasantville aka Kathryn Cramer16:32, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it is fair use, as these posts have been quoted and responded to and are part of public discourse. I'm not the expert on that though. 8-) --Liz Henry 17:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Names and pseudonyms

I'm really not digging this distinction between the pseudonyms and the driver's license names. Is this necessary, and if so, why? - vito excalibur

Yes. Since it is important to know who is speaking, and for half the participants, we don't. --Pleasantville 17:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

This was one the sub-issues raised in the events being documented, and so I personally disagree on the wiki taking a position on it here. --Kate Nepveu

There's really no way not to take a position on it: either we separate the names or we don't. -- vito excalibur

I don't see any point in separating people out under different headings. If the person has, themselves, associated their real name with their screen name or pen name, or if it is common public knowledge (as it is for my screen name of badgerbag), list one with the other(s) right next to it and alphabetize under the name you think people are most commonly known by. If there are pages for both identities, link them to each other or make a redirect page. By the way, to make this nifty name/time stamp, click the signature-looking thing in the little toolbar above the edit text input window, and it will magically appear.. --Liz Henry 17:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I put that badly. Let me rephrase: I disagree with Kathryn Cramer that the distinction was necessary or useful. And now I see that it's been changed while I was off. -- Kate Nepveu

I think it sort of speaks for itself anyway.--Pleasantville 18:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)