David Gerard wrote:
> 2008/12/26 Soxred93 <soxred93(a)gmail.com>om>:
>
>> Maybe we can set it for only 1 day, but use a JS hack to say that
>> it's indefinite. That might get the word out to them. :)
>
>
> The idea of blocking a whole ISP is unlikely to fly. I suspect that
> an admin placing such a block without agreement from the arbcom and
> the Foundation (cos you *know* they'd get the crap for it) would be
> (a) quickly reversed (b) given a slap round the head with a trout at
> the very least.
>
> Attention-getting blocks have worked on bodies the size of
> universities before (I recall two of them, both put into place by a
> sitting arbitrator who then managed relations with the organisations
> very closely), but even then it was a very last desperate resort.
> Throwing our weight around like that would be a PR disaster, no
> matter how unresponsive Verizon were being.
This is one reason I suggested that it come from Foundation level, to an
equivalent stratum of responsibility, to head off the PR outfall. If
negotiations fail, there would be a difficult trade-off between defending
our position without giving details (per [[WP:DFTT]], [[WP:BEANS]] and
[[WP:DENY]]), and making our case. Some overview of the damage caused would
be a must.
However, as an Admin, the integrity of the encyclopedia is more or less my
first duty, and I don't have a problem about blocking a whole ISP for one
day if that is the only way of getting their attention.