Re: [WikiEN-l] Assume bad faith, for banned users.
> Earlier: "... if a banned user wants to
> convince me of something ..." "... I bet
> there's ten times the traffic on this list
> by regular users responding to banned
> users, or debating topics brought up by
> banned users, as there is by banned
> users..." "...If you've been independently
> banned from that many sites ... it's
> almost certainly your fault ..." "... if you'd
> rather ... let something disgusting ...
> occur just to keep from being banned,
> then fine ..." "... This is a waste of time.
> Can we ban him from this list please? ..."
Peter Blaise responds: Ahh, meta discussions - discussions about our
discussions. Every community has 'em.
If we stop banning or deleting anything that's not spam, not vandalism,
not off topic, that would allow us to recycle all this energy into
constructive activities.
Or not.
It's up to us. Even without a ban on banning, admins could volunteer
NOT to ban, all on their own, and go out and construct something,
instead.
It could happen.
==========
Re: [WikiEN-l] Time to reboot wikien-l
> Earlier: "... find a collection of people who
> are willing to moderate wikien-forum ...
> People write in proposing new threads.
> If any moderator thinks the topic is
> interesting or important, they can
> volunteer to curate the thread ..."
It's called BLOGS, and anyone can do that now, all on their own. No
one's stopping 'em.
Otherwise, I will NEVER understand why someone complains about their own
inability to scroll on, or hit their own delete key, and instead blames
someone else for all their own incessant typing to respond to something
that does not interest them.
Huh? 'splain away - I'm all ears!
Anyway, I like the archives because I can search for threads I missed or
was not interested in at the time. If I were to block threads that were
not interesting to me at any one moment in time, this list and it's
archives would not exist - hey, it would be my blog! Doh!