On 10/6/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 23:17:54 +0100, Guy Chapman aka JzG guy.chapman@spamcop.net wrote:
Ok, here's a basic question. One we should all be able to agree on. Should a "suspected sockpuppet" (new username) of a username block be blocked for being a sockpuppet? It's a simple enough question. Yes or no?
And in trying to render it as an unambiguous yes/no answer you have the nub of the problem: it depends entirely on who the puppeteer is, the quality of the evidence, the edits which were made under the suspected sock account.
Oh, plus, blocking is preventative. Is there a potential problem to be averted? Will blocking and then discussing on the user talk page be a better result for the project than letting them edit?
In the case I quoted, there was no "blocking and then discussing on the user talk page", there was instead "blocking and chain reverting the unblock template and then getting someone to block them for supposed template abuse."
Parker