On 03/09/07, Cheney Shill halliburton_shill@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Armed Blowfish diodontida.armata@googlemail.com wrote:
On 02/09/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
I'd rather not post a list of those on mod as it may seem like personal black marks against them.
If you show such consideration on the list, which does not have particularly high Google rankings, why should it bother you if someone asks for blocked and banned editors to be shown similar consideration on Wikipaedia, which does have very high Google rankings?
I agree with Blowfish & Riddel on this.
Those "moderated"/blocked on Wikipedia and the other wikis are openly known and available for anybody, not just users. Saying the mail moderation list is private is, beside inconsistent and contrary to the otherwise open policy, bordering on stupid CYA antics.
I could understand if it's a size issue. Couldn't that be resolved via dumping it into a compressed file and posting it to media?
~~Pro-Lick http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick http://www.wikiality.com/User:Pro-Lick (Wikia supported site since 2006)
--spam may follow--
Inconsistent, yes, except my suggestion was opposite: that those blocked and/or banned on-wiki should be shown the same consideration.
Some blocked and/or banned users who have made their real names known have complained to me that the blocking / banning process included libel against them. (Don't ask who, that's confidential.)
That said, adding a feature to let the moderated user decide whether or not he or she wishes to appear on a public list of moderated users shouldn't be that complex for a programmer to add. The default, I guess, would be hidden, but it would allow the moderated user a choice in the matter.