On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 21:22:27 -0000 (GMT), Tony Sidaway minorityreport@bluebottle.com wrote:
nsh said:
A good wikipedian, whose name I forget, explained to 3RR to me in a very useful way, explaining that it is best to be seen as a slap in the face because if one has to resort to reverting the same page thrice in one day, there is something wrong with one's editing/dispute-resolution procedures.
So why don't we start viewing the 3RR as a good idea, an inspiration for finding better ways to overcome dispute and achieve consensus, and a tool to let people know when they need to introspect. But let us not view is as a commandment, set in stone, to be applied rigidly.
Those two paragraphs seem to be mutually contradictory. Surely if three reverts is a sign that there is something wrong (a sentiment with which I strongly agree) we don't want to just regard 3RR as "a good idea, an inspiration." It should be taken as what it is: a sign that we're doing something seriously wrong. We shouldn't, therefore, be too surprised if someone comes along and gives us 24 hours off the task of editing, during which we can reconsider our editing style.
My phrasing rarely leaves nothing to be desired :-) I do agree that in many cases a temporary block is necessary to help provoke the introspection that I mentioned, however this does not mean that it is always needed, or more importantly that the block achieves anything in or of itself. It ought always be accompanied with an explaination that there are better ways to solve disputes, preferably with some pointers as to how the person in question could go about learning or practising these improved methods.
My only fear is that all too often those 24 hours will not be spent trying to improve one's understanding of Wikipedia and the Wiki way, but in the development of fuming resentment which aids no-one and nothing. Is this entirely the fault of the person implimenting the block? No. But neither would it be entriely the fault of the person who is blocked if they are not afforded an opportunity to understand why such action has been taken away from them or if such action is taken prematurely.
Hope this clarifies my nsh-waffle.
Yours, &c -nsh