[summary: Arbital's scope does not currently include people, but even unlisted pages and discussions about people may not contain derogatory, insulting, or potentially defamatory content.]
Arbital's scope does not currently include people, but even unlisted pages and discussions about people may not contain derogatory, insulting, or potentially defamatory content (regardless of whether it is true). The person in question may request content be removed from their page, or the page itself be taken down.
As and when we expand to officially covering people a process for controlling which information to allow on their pages will be created, with extremely conservative protections against at least false, unwarranted, unsourced, or non-public-interest negative coverage.
[comment: As a very strong default, if we expand far enough to have pages on Joe Smith, then the page on Joe Smith should only say nice things about Joe. If Joe doesn't think something is nice, it goes off the page.]
[comment: Maybe later we might have some kind of extremely conservative process for doing something different with Ted Bundy's page, along the lines of, "If Ted Bundy's Wikipedia page already says that he's a sufficiently awful person, then it's okay to have further debates about that." At present, no such process on Arbital exists.]
[comment: Very few people on this Earth lead such a perfect life that sufficient Internet scrutiny couldn't find some life mistakes to talk about. Thus, scaling up from the scope of Wikipedia while failing to have a sufficiently strong rule about what debates can go on Joe Smith's page, or what actually true facts can go on Joe Smith's page, would turn the Internet into a living hell for almost all of humanity. This we prefer not to do.]