This rule is not that clear cut. A quarrelsome user cannot by picking
petty quarrels thus insulate themselves from administrative action.
The dispute must have been substantial and the block is good in any
event. Treating it as a "non-negotiable directive" is inappropriate.
It is more an action which can get you into trouble and possibly lead
to loss of administrative status in egregious and repeated cases.
On May 19, 2006, at 4:49 AM, Molu wrote:
I think we need some mechanism to impress it upon admins that it
is not okay under any circumstances to block users you have been
involved in a dispute with. It's currently treated as something
optional by some admins. Usually the blocks they make are
justified, but surely posting to AN/I is a better idea? IMO, This
needs to be a non-negotiable directive, DO NOT BLOCK A USER YOU ARE
ENGAGED IN A DISPUTE WITH, no matter how obviously the block is
needed. This will save a lot of rants and hurt feelings.
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and
30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
WikiEN-l mailing list
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: