On 10/6/05, Michael Turley
<michael.turley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That's what I saw, too. Perhaps the threat
of 3RR was an unseen
motivation to encourage everyone to actually try to work it out rather
than insist on one's own version. I know it has been for me at least
once, so even if I don't get bitten, the guard dog helps secure the
property. ;-) It helps me pay attention a little better. (!)
That's what it's supposed to be. Unfortunately, it's far too often
used by editors as a club: if someone makes an edit you don't like,
maneuver them into being the "first to revert" and then revert-war
them until they cross 3RR one step ahead of you, then report them.
Bam, he's blocked, and all you have to do to win the edit war for 24
hours is get a friend to revert his last edit.
I'm frequently tempted to block BOTH parties in situations like this,
one for blocking the 3RR and the other for gaming it. Unfortunately,
there's a number of admins who engage in this sort of behavior, and
I'm not really interested in getting into a block war or putting up
with the whining (and the RFCs) that I'd almost certainly get were I
to do this. As a result, I tend to avoid enforcing the 3RR at all.
As do a lot of the other admins I talk to.
Maybe we should add the "guard dog" analogy to the rule, since guard
dogs sometimes go a little outside the bounds of their confines at
unexpected times. This would also support admins such as yourself,
who are attempting to apply the spirit of the rule rather than just
enforcing to the letter.
--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused