[WikiEN-l] extremely weak dispute resolution mechanisms

[Jimmy Wales]

Grease Monkee wrote:
> First, a simple example;
> 1) Newbi is a disruptive moron, HardAss(admin) gives him simple clear
> instructions on how not to be disruptive moron, once.
> 2) Newbi replies to HardAss(admin); "Fuck You", and continues to disrupt.
> 3) HardAss blocks Newbi and gives another short, clear lecture on how to
> behave
> 4) Newbi replies by spitting venom and calling for justice over his violated
> civil rights.
> 5) Cycle repeats, escalating each time in the tone of rhetoric and length of
> blocks.
> 6) Along comes NiceGuy(admin) who sticks up for Newbi, telling him
> "..listen, I will unblock you, but you gotta do x,y and z..." Thereby
> supplying a face saving mechanism for Newbi.
> 7) Newbi either starts to behave, or gets blocked for longer and longer
> periods
> 
> The most common mistake made implementing this strategy is that NiceGuy is
> overly critical of HardAss, not realising that his mentorship of Newbi won't
> work without the threat of HardAss looming. Likewise, HardAss often takes it
> personally when NiceGuy unblocks someone, not realising it as a face saving
> feature that allows Newbi to behave.

Good faith communication among admins is critical to this sort of thing.
 In such a case, NiceGuy should try to contact HardAss beforehand to get
agreement on the strategy.  Or _even better_, HardAss admins should seek
out NiceGuy admins and say to them "Look here, I've been bonking this
guy on the head for a bit, to minimal effect, but if you want to come in
and befriend him and try and turn him about, I'm happy to lay off."

--Jimbo