--- "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" jwales@wikia.com wrote:
Robert Brookes wrote:
I thought that the beauty of the 3RR rule was its
"simplicity" in
that when a breach is committed there is no doubt?
No sooner had the
ink dried on that policy update that such a breach
could lead to a 24
hour block than some of the more "imaginative"
sysops were proposing
to "interpret" the intention of a specific editor
and demanding the
power to block at will based on their personal
interpretation.
A too-strict interpretation will just force edit warriors to randomly change irrelevant words while still reverting.
For some things, simple common sense is still best. Anyone can start to game any rule.
--Jimbo
The converse of course is that too much freedom of interpretation will make for even greater abuse by sysops where they block editors at will. As it stands the evidence is already clear that there are people who are being elected as sysops after a few months purely on the basis that they will enforce "discipline" as their sole contribution to Wikipedia. This is a dangerous development and rather than encourage these "gunslingers" futher one should consider rule changes and adaptions. The use of a (Gestapo-style) heavy hand in controlling the actions of people is not something Wikipedia should create an environment to florish. (So stated to commemorate the liberation of the prisoners from Auswitz 60 years ago)
Robert
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250