Delirium wrote:
>...
>Perhaps it's a personal opinion, but I think we
>ought to strive to be as open and accomodating
>as possible, and avoid banning as much as
>possible, since that's basically a "we give up,
>this person cannot work within Wikipedia" decision.
>...
I hope this will become the general ethos of the dispute resolution process.
If not, then, IMO, we would have failed. However, arbitration is on the tail
end of that process so I imagine that a fair number of arbitration cases will
result in some type of editing sanction period (such as slowdowns, not able
to edit certain articles or kinds of articles, not able to edit in a certain
namespace(s), not being able to edit at all for a short term, and not being
able to edit at all for a long term).
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)