Has anyone heretofore commented on Wikipedia: Linking to External Harassment?

I can't remember specifics, but I have seen some comments removed and editors blocked under that "proposed" policy.

I thought it was a real policy, though, not just a proposal. Of course, some already think it's policy anyway.

It is a complex multifaceted approach. In an intellectually honest context that would be good. On WP it will be subject to manipulation and the distortion from the hidden calculus of influence in the dysfunctional social networking environment.

Well, I guess it's nice that they provide their internal definition of the word "harassment" (boldface mine):
Of course, most traditional dictionaries define the word somewhat differently. However, true to form, Wikipedia's definition is the broadest:
Good ol' Wikipedia - always ready with the vague and equivocal when the cabal's gotta have it!

There's really no need to manipulate anything with this. It's easy enough to just cite things that appear to uncritically support your view, when the context is ignored.

And now there's this discussion on the wikien-l list. JzG is encountering a surprising number of skeptics.

Note how they have to qualify "external," harassment of regular editors by administrators and arbitrators being not only acceptable, but laudable.

Seriously, if outing someone and hosting attacks on them is harassment, then arbitrators should stop doing it. Otherwise, all they're really saying is that who gets harassed should rightly be up to them.

Well said by Mangoe.