On Nov 30, 2007 6:29 PM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee(a)rahul.net> wrote:
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>> She won't now have a shot at ArbCom.
Big wow. Now compare to the
various
proposed remedies of banning for 90 days, restricted
editing in
Wikipedia namespace etc. *point to the subject line of "balance of
sanction*.
What additional sanctions do you think would be appropriate for an
erroneous block that was undone in 72 minutes?
Who's asking for additional
sanctions. When there is an imbalance of
remedies increasing sanctions to the putatively less sanctioned party is
not the only solution. Sometimes reducing sanctions to the other works
just as well.
Actually, there's one "remedy" that can be applied: give permission for
the
message to be posted.
If there's a copyright claim in play (and all I have to go on is what's on
wiki and public emails on this, which are suggestive but not conclusive),
then nobody on Arbcom or at the Foundation has the legal right to say that.
One could hypothetically posit a remedy requiring someone to drop such a
legal claim and allow posting of a message with the alternative being some
sort of punishment, but such are normally described as extortion in the
legal sense, and at best odious.
It's far easier to just point to the WR article or wherever it's up right
now and say "the posting -> over there" than continue to fight over it on WP
proper.
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com