Just to keep everyone guessing here, ha ha, I'm actually very sympathetic to what Mark is saying.
One of the things that's tempting about the 3-revert rule is that it's easy to administer and judge after the fact. There are precious few borderline cases. Reverting is reverting, anyone can check the logs after the fact and see it. This is very different from subjective judgments like "hostility" and "rude" and even "vandalism".
If we had a rule that say "3 reverts and you're out for 24 hours", it would be fairly hard for sysops to abuse it. It at least has that as a merit.
Delirium wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I agree that these matters need to be considered on a case-by-case basis. A person who engages in a protracted revert war on a single article is very different from one who repeatedly does this across a broad range of articles.
I guess I don't see what the problem with solving them all in the same way is. A person who engages in a protracted revert war on a single article will get a single 24-hour ban, which is not really the end of the world. A person who repeatedly does this across a broad range of articles will be repeatedly banned for 24-hour periods, resulting in effectively a permanent ban until they decide to stop engaging in revert-wars.
-Mark
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l