[Foundation-l] Dealing with interwiki disruption

[Milos Rancic]

On Thursday 08 May 2008 11:21:33 Birgitte SB wrote:
> There have already been several people in this thread from English non-WP
> wikis who have said they do not want to implement blocks/bans from en.WP
> and they have given actual examples showing they would lose valuable
> contributers. As I haven't said so before let me add my voice to say that I
> do not think people blocked on en.WP are inherently problems at en.WS.  Why
> are you pushing this?

I am not talking about short-term blocks, I am talking about 6 months+ blocks. 
Also, I am not talking about this as a mandatory solution, but as an opt-in 
solution. (Note that en.wp is not my home project, too.)

There are a couple of good reasons for that:

- en.wp ArbCom has its own rules and I am sure that it isn't making mistakes 
about long term blocks.

- Long term blocks are reserved for very disruptive users. I really don't 
think that someone who was so disruptive at en.wp -- would be more 
constructive at some other project.

- Small projects (not those maintained by stewards, but those which have a 
community) usually suffer heavily by users already proved as disruptive at 
en.wp. (This is especially true for non-English projects.) Usually, the same 
user will be blocked at other wiki, but in a very painful process for that 
community.

- If Meta ArbCom becomes reality, I think that it should process all longer 
blocks made by any other ArbCom and conclude are the reasons good enough for 
long time block (which means that such user should get Wikimedia-wide block) 
or a local ArbCom should consider decision once again.

- It is also possible option that en.wp ArbCom gives a suggestion for longer 
blocks: are they strictly en.wp related or a user is a threat to all WM 
projects.

With some discussion about this issue, I am sure that we would be able to find 
a way how to deal better and faster with disruptive users.