--- David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Con for your otherwise good proposal:
- More bureaucracy. See [[m:instruction creep]] -
Not if its just reinstituting the basic common sense approach that was common before the newer absolutist protection policy.
the people causing the problem won't read the instructions either, or we wouldn't have had the problem in the first place.
Which is why a moderation process should be an alternate to the existing one trick pony {{protected}} policy.
One thing I've been wishing for lately is some way for third parties to drag edit warriors to mediation.
Right. Mediation (aka "group therapy") is completely besides the point of dealing with the article in the short term.
took a *lot* of dragging. And we appear to have a shortage of mediators ... (This is me not volunteering!)
Any sysop could and should be a moderator for an article - but by claiming the role, they have some *responsibility to follow process and deal with the concerns, in addition to the *privelige of editing the protected article. Plus that {{protected}} message is just too unnecesarily big...
S
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail