--- Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
If we want to reduce edit wars, the solution may not be to ban people, but to improve their tolerance to each other. If we want to limit pov, the solution is not to limit the number of editors, but on contrary to increase it.
As a test, on Occupation of Palestine (about a month ago) I called for a timeout. I came in through a prompt on this list by Ed Poor, who was involved in the escalating war of words. I put a notice that the page should not be changed for 48 hours, by any participant.
Ambi was not too supportive and asked me not to do it again (see my talk page).
I wonder, though, whether that is a viable solution for edit wars between logged in users. I agree that banning one party but not the other can often be interpreted as: there is a winner and there is a loser. This only reinforces animosity between wikipedians.
What I asked for in the timeout is that people think about what the page should become, and make changes offline, or on their own user pages.
I'd like some feedback from some of the participants as to the pros and cons of this approach.
It is my hope that we can develop a way to defuse edit wars early while allowing everyone to "save face" and have time to think things through.
===== Chris Mahan 818.943.1850 cell chris_mahan@yahoo.com chris.mahan@gmail.com http://www.christophermahan.com/
_______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com