Rick wrote:
Are you saying you are prepared to ban a user because you are having an edit war with him? That is MOST DEFINITELY an abuse of your sysop powers, and should cause YOU to be instantly banned.
That isn't what he said, actually. (I know I'm a few days late, just back from a wedding, so maybe what I'm about to say has already been said.)
Erik has proposed that Jtdirl's actions on the Mother Theresa article were of the sort that, in his view, ought to lead us to consider a ban of Jtdirl. Not having yet reviewed the whole conflagration, I can't say for sure, but I'm rather inclined to suppose that I would not agree with that assessment.
I prefer for people to not be very quick at all to rush to the notion that a ban is the proper solution for a problem. And that's why we are headed toward a system where formal mediation is the "first final step".
Particularly for longtime contributors like Jtdirl and Erik, both of whom know and accept the NPOV policy as foundational, it strikes me as very unlikely that we'll be unable to produce an article that both find satisfactory.
The process of getting to that version may be a bit rough and tumble at times, of course. It might occassionally, and regrettably, involve some heated words. But as long as we all remain passionately and lovingly committed to the overarching ideal of neutrality, we can see effective progress made.
--Jimbo