Denny Colt wrote:
Actually thats exactly it. People edit warred with me to ensure brandt's
words stayed up. I don't understand why he gets a free pass, as Erica said.
Either all banned users should, or none. If they want to contribute... use a
different name. If we KNOW it's them, rv them as policy says. If that isn't
right, change the policy.
As somebody who restored (to the talk page) Brandt's comment on the most
recent Brandt AfD, I'd advocate the latter. To me, a ban should be
*permission* (and perhaps encouragement) to revert on site, but not an
absolute requirement.
In the case of the comment on his AfD, it was more or less civilly
stated and a useful contribution to the discussion (mainly, IMHO, in
that kept people from speculating endlessly on what his views might be).
A policy that forces editors to make things unambiguously worse should
be changed, if only to prevent similarly endless discussion on when to
apply IAR and how this place is going to hell in a handbasket.
William