On 2/22/07, Ron Ritzman <ritzman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/21/07, Rich Holton <richholton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps I'm misconstruing your point. Is your
question rhetorical, or
actually seeking information? Are you suggesting that, if a "newbie
editor" were to simply walk away, there would be no problem?
If the newbie's (or anybody else's) change to an article is reverted
and he can't make his case in the "talk" phase then yes "walk
away"[1]. There's no consensus for his change. A "dick" phase is not
going to change that. If he strongly feels that. If he strongly feels
that the article is being defended in a state that violates policy
then there are "non dick" paths he can follow such as rfcs or arbcom.
If he can't get satisfaction there then hey that's life. You can't win
them all.
A "new user" who goes to either of these in less than 6 months is the most
likely candidate for the "sockpuppet aaugh sockpuppet" form of abuse all too
prevalent. He's also likely to be declared a sockpuppet/meatpuppet based on
the short life of account and/or IP address status alone, despite policy
stating that new people arrive to WP all the time (ESPECIALLY on the
articles that are highly contentious and involve plenty of POV issues) and
with no other evidence.
The system itself is abusive.
Parker
--
====
Parker Peters
http://parkerpeters.livejournal.com