At 01:48 PM 06/09/02 -0700, lcrocker(a)nupedia.com wrote:
I'm also sympathetic to the possibility that maybe
one way to
attract and keep more experts is to be less tolerant of nonsense
and more liberal with blocks and other "official" sanctions.
I've been thinking along these lines myself, but didn't want to be the
first to say it. :)
Putting up with disruptive participants is noble and useful up to a point,
especially if these participants are also providing some positive input
along with the nonsense. But past that point it starts to drive away lots
of other participants who don't want to put up with them any more, and one
has to decide whether it's worth it.
Banning someone for being disruptive is not necessarily the top of a
"slippery slope" towards censorship, as long as we're careful about doing
it and keep a watchful eye on ourselves. On the other hand, letting
disruptive yahoos get away with everything will eventually mean that only
the disruptive yahoos stick around.