And when "troublemaker" is in the eye of whoever is being a POV warrior, it becomes a tool of edit warring.
Just like the "block" button in the hand of some recent Admins has been a tool of revert warring and asserting dominance.
They pay NO attention to the fact that blocks are not supposed to be punitive. Instead, we have hags like Ambi who take PRIDE in the fact that they are doling out punishments to those who cry foul over their abuse of power.
From: Angela beesley@gmail.com Reply-To: Angela beesley@gmail.com,English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org To: Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com,English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Intention of Rollback Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:57:41 +0200
On 7/1/05, Dan Grey dangrey@gmail.com wrote:
What was the original purpose of the Rollback - purely to revert vandalism? And is it considered bad form to use it to revert good-faith edits by other editors (not troublemakers)?
I asked a similar question (a very long wikitime ago)
Brion replied: "Its intent is solely to be a timesaving shortcut for reverting mass vandalism."
Reverting good faith edits without explanation shouldn't be done, and the rollback prevents any explanation, giving the impression that you are viewing the other person's edits as vandalism, so I would suggest that it is bad form to use it in that way.
Angela. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_________________________________________________________________ Millions of quality singles are online now - click to meet them! http://match.msn.ie