Robert Brookes wrote:
I thought that the beauty of the 3RR rule was its
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
sysops were proposing
to "interpret" the intention of a
and demanding the
power to block at will based on their personal
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.
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)
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.