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?
On 10/6/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Oct 2006 07:31:37 -0500, "Parker Peters"
<onmywayoutster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is a larger problem I have with our policies,
though. Every policy
we
have on the matter is designed to make it
impossible for an aggrieved
user
to make any protest against abuse.
No, none of the *policies* we have prevent this, I think. It is very
hard to be truly objective when reviewing unblock requests, though,
and we definitely need more people like JoshuaZ and Phaedirel who are
able to see the good in everybody.
But let's be honest, the SPUIs of this world are tolerated despite the
disruption they cause. Sock-farming POV pushers should be shown the
door speedily and in no uncertain terms.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l