I totally agree with that statement. In the old days bans were done to protect the project from harm, but more and more they are done as a punishment (which is supposedly counter to the rules) or to protect a popular point of view. The end result is bans do more harm to the project than they prevent. They only affect those that want to obey them and are easily ignored.

 

 

 

------ Original message------

From: Fæ

Date: Fri, Dec 12, 2014 5:52 AM

To: GenderGap;

Subject:[Gendergap] Carolmooredc's talk page now made uneditable

 

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Carolmooredc

After adding links to the Slate article to Carol's talk page, the page
has now been protected against all edits apart from sysops. In my
view, the gradual change over the last two years to seeing the edit
rights of banned users changed so they can no longer discuss their ban
or related issues, is a poor move for openness of the project, and a
distinct lack of belief in reform or the ability of the project to
welcome back past banned or blocked users.

This case is doubly offensive as now nobody can use Carol's talk page
to ask about the ban or develop evidence that might help with an unban
request.

I have raised a polite request with the admin that took this action at
,
should this fail, then I can escalate to have this reviewed at
.
If anyone on this list would like to support removing the edit block
on Carol's page, now is the time to make yourself heard on-wiki.

Thanks,
Fae
-- 
faewik@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap