On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 22:18 -0400, Steve Summit wrote:
Durovawrote:
There are times to put one's foot down and that time was today. Wikipedia has been entirely too lenient about this type of disruption, with the result that when one brief and overdue block occurs a cluster of people are shocked by it.
I understand. But it behooves you to be careful, to choose the best moment to put your foot down.
If Cla68 is as disruptive as claimed -- and I have no reason to doubt it -- you need only a little patience to wait for a truly disruptive action to apply the waited-for block in response to. But this wasn't it:
So we have during discussion in one thread (AbCom I think) where people comment there wouldn't be nearly as many difficult cases reaching AbCom / user getting to the point of being so disruptive that the only remedy is long banning etc. because no one put the foot down early on. And then we have in another thread saying only put your foot down when the user end up doing something truly bad even in isolation not taking into account of prior behavior.
Now, which one is it going to be? Put your foot down early on, with increasing severity as suggested during the AbCom thread so users get the idea their pattern of behavior will not be tolerated, and hopefully for them to change their way. Or is it going to be wait for the big one, and respond in kind.
Take your pick, but one can't have it both ways.
KTC