To move to a personal page/ref to Topic:Xgg6dvg2athdb1h7

With reference of the following topic: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Xgg6dvg2athdb1h7

Regarding all that my feeling is that, if the proposed clause has been written for a few and very specific use-cases (like the mentioned fascipedia.org, apart that, checking the site, I didn't find any reference to MediaWiki, also the logo on the footer has been removed), it is preferable to not encode it in the Code of Conduct. If you want to encode it in the CoC in my opinion, for the implications that have been partially mentioned in the discussion, it is likely that you should at the same time attach a ToC (Terms and Conditions) on user creation (as well as for all the current users who did not sign it) stating clearly that they might be subjected to summary assessment by administrators and moderators of Wikimedia support forums as soon as they ask for or provide "help, support or technical assistance", to determine whether or not their websites violate the CoC of Wikimedia support forums. It's also possible that a similar statement and annex shall be included besides the MediaWiki software license (informing that MediaWiki is a free software, however that technical support provided within official Wikimedia support forums is only granted to those WIKIs which comply with the Wikimedia support forums CoC, and therefore that they are subjected to summary checks or assessment in order to verify that). So of course all that can be fine, however as you see and as participants have partially noted, it has profound implications. To my feeling if the purpose of the clause is just and actually to safeguard the image of Wikimedia support forums, against well-know users that based on their sole usernames and their (in turn well-known) connections, damage (also in a way not deterministically or not-unambiguously inferred or determined) such image (but I would not mention as Tgr did "the normal functioning of the community", since this implies a proactive limitations on contents that might not yet or are yet to be written, thus falling back into the same problem of the clause under discussion), then the proposed clause could be written in a different and possibly more transparent way, something like:

[it is discouraged or forbidden ...] Soliciting help, support or technical assistance for users [since it is inferred that theoretically you aren't checking their WIKIs, otherwise the license or ToC should be adjusted consequently] who in a noticeable and measurable way link our community (or Wikimedia support forums' userbase and community) to organizations, persons or websites that are found cause image damage (or other immaterial damage) to Wikimedia support forums and/or the core principles of the MediaWiki software. For example, if your website advocates violence or hate speech, there shouldn't be any noticeable reference in this forum.

I think this way you are telling that you won't check beforehand their WIKIs, which moreover could be cumbersome for administrators and moderators, but rather you sanction any reference (including the username itself) which could be a distinctive element within Wikimedia support forums of anything that could damage them in any way. Then if you want to go beyond, and to sanctions users who ask or solicit for support for their beliefs and opinions, without any noticeable impact for Wikimedia support forums as such (at least for the majority of their users) I think that other changes and additions should be made as already mentioned in related terms of use (if any) licenses and policies.

Of course I don't say that I'm pro or against my proposed amendment, it could be just a bit more consistent of the proposed clause, if you really think you need it.