Pete/Pcb21 (pete_pcb21_wpmail@pcbartlett.com) [050203 08:47]:
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
Yes, and there are some good reasons to interpret it fairly literally, while at the same time leaving a little breathing room for common sense recognition that randomly changing one irrelevant word in a different part of the article is still a revert.
The problem with interpretations and hundreds of admins is that it only needs one admin with a "hardline" attitude for the user to be blocked (however temporarily). Under the current model, the will of the mass of the community is irrelevant, it is the outlying opinions that have most weight.
Other admins have the option of unblocking an egregious block.
And, you know, editors have the option of not reverting more than three times in a day.
- d.