-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
David Gerard wrote:
Honestly, I think that anyone who reads [[WP:3RR]] and fails to understand:
"The three-revert rule is not an entitlement, but an "electric fence"; the 3RR is intended to stop edit wars. It does not grant users an inalienable right to three reverts every 24 hours or endorse reverts as an editing technique. Persistent reversion remains strongly discouraged and is unlikely to constitute working properly with others."
- is too stupid (possibly wilfully stupid) to understand without
falling afoul of it. As we've seen from this thread, even then they frequently can't or won't learn.
Well, after warning someone about the 3RR because I saw that he had reverted twice in a couple hours (with some snippy edit summaries), he made the following elaborate argument that he had done nothing wrong. You can see my painful, and ultimately fruitless, attempt to explain the situation to him at [[User talk:Freemarkets]].
According to baseball rules, if one has "more than 2 strikes" called against him while at bat, that player will be called "out." In other words, each batter is "entitled" to 2 strikes before being called "out." According to Wikipedia rules, if one edits a page "more than three times" in a 24 hour period, he is subject to being blocked. How is it, then, that that rule does NOT "entitle" an editor to "three reverts" without being called out? If one must break a rule to be blocked, and one cannot break the rule without reverting more than 3 times in 24 hours, then how have I violated the rule, and how would I be subject to being banned? Further, of what use is your warning?--Freemarkets http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Freemarkets&action=edit 11:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Ryan