On 28/03/07, Denny Colt <wikidenny(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/28/07, Erica <fangaili(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Arbcom have in the past ruled that acting as a
proxy for a blocked
user is a serious offence.
--
geni
That's not what we're talking about at all.
Erica
Its part of it. People I think are letting it slide for comments,
because
there is no penalty.
But most importantly: why Brandt's free pass?
--
- Denny
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
This has already been answered several times so far, but I'll repeat the
basic points:
Brandt is not being given a 'free pass' to edit, he is being allowed to make
useful comments about concerns he has about his own article. I am certain
that if he were to make any abusive edits to [[Talk: Daniel Brandt]], they
would be reverted. However, reverting his edits to the _talk page_ of the
article about *himself* when he's merely expressing concerns about an
article that could affect his PERSONAL LIFE directly is simply unfair and
isn't going to help anybody.
He's not being given 'special treatment'; I would expect any other banned
users with articles about themselves to be treat the same.