On Sep 15, 2006, at 9:09 PM, geni wrote:
If I can't remember how many warnings a vandal gets, I'll just zap 'em for 24 hours two warnings early, and call it a day.
This violates AGF thus WP:DICK.
As an admin you are not empowered to do this. Those who enjoy state analogies would use the comparison you have the role of the police rather than the executive.
Those who prefer analogies from the world of comic books would argue that you're Judge Dread rather than Rorschach. You do not have the power to decide to make a practice of not warning vandals.
Unless I happened to guess wrong and two warnings is now the convention, I didn't say I was swearing off vandal warning. I said I'm not going to worry about going up from {{test}} to {{test500}} or whatever insane number has been cooked up - I'll warn once or twice, zap, and call it a day.
If it's against policy, it must be bad for some reason, so just explain to me what it does that's bad.
You wish to waste other people's time?
If it's not obvious why it's bad, I don't really see it as a waste of time.
I figure anything so complex an admin who's been editing for two and a half years can't do it is fundamentally broken.
You realise you've just claimed that our copyright policy is fundamentally broken? We've got enough problems with people ignoring it or trying to get around it we don't need any more.
Is our copyright policy that bad? We should probably fix it up then.
-Phil