On 12/25/05, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
now for four or five days). Rather, I think that the NOEDITSECTION was an imposition that disproportionately hit legitimate editors of the article, while delivering no measurable reduction of vandalism in the face of a sustained campaign of vandalism by a particular person or group--the kind of campaign that I know from experience can be ignored, because it has little of no effect on the ability of good faith editors to continue their work.
That's a nice change - most of the complaints at GWB seem to be the opposite: people complaining that a small number of legitimate editors were being blocked along with the vast numbers of vandals, and they thought *that* was unfair :)
Steve