--- Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
Anthere-
For sure, this cannot be a reason for banning.
It would be nice and an entirely new approach to things if people actually started to read what I write.
I did read what you wrote :-) I promise I did. I always read what you write. I rarely agree with you, but I like you nonetheless. I rarely agree with you but your opinions are supported, fair and interesting. So, I always read you :-)
Among all your propositions, I found one I happen to agree with. Which is "making a valid email adress when registering a requirement".
I proposed to *enforce
the existing ban* on Lir.
But, it is not sure it is Lir
For this, the threshold of annoyance should
arguably be much lower.
If it is proved PP is Lir, you have enough of a reason to ban her (along current trend of hard banning anyway). If it cannot be proved PP is Lir, she must be treated just as any other contributor. In which case, the threshold has to be the same for her than for anyone. You, Quercus, Lir or me.
Furthermore, Lir's number of edits is excessive by any standard. At which point does it get too much? 100 edits per page? 1000?
Ok. Let's set a number then :-) I would say the treshold would be different for a list than for a regular article.
Seriously, a much more important topic right now imho, is the absolutely incredible slughishness (I really can't find the right spelling, sorry) of Wikip�dia. Which is currently basically making it non editable :-(((
Regards,
Erik
Amicalement
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com