On 6/23/06, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/23/06, Warren Blanco fireislandparadise@gmail.com wrote:
Lack of warning
A 3RR ban cannot be imposed against an editor who has not been warned
that
he or she is in danger of violating the 3RR. A ban can only be imposed
when
an editor violates the 3RR after receiving a warning even if he or she
has
already tecnically violated the 3RR prior to receiving a warning.
Strongly oppose. Admins should use discretion in not blocking unwarned users, but they shouldn't be prevented from doing so. 3RR is already subject to gaming, and it only works because it's so strict. Giving more escape clauses is a bad idea.
Steve
Small point of order: 3RR doesn't work for shit.
3RR is supposed to be an "electric fence" of some sort. Instead, though, all it does is make edit warring into a game of chicken. One side of a dispute dredges up sockpuppets/meatpuppets, the other does the same, and they play the "gotcha" game with their patron admins on either side standing by to drop a block on the opposing side at moment's notice.
Then whichever side got the block fumes, while the other side has free rein to make the article into complete lunacy... until the block expires and they go back to warring.
It's the same thing with our page protection policies. A bunch of edit warriors start reverting each other and then demanding the page be locked to their preferred version. Demand that it be locked, and get one of their friendly patron admins (and thanks to the broken RFA procedure these days, we've got a fuck-ton of those too) to make sure the lock is on "their" version.
We need better policies. Policies that actually make sense. I proposed, a long while back, changing the page-lock procedure (in the case of edit wars as opposed to mere vandalism) so that the page be blanked or stubbed while it's locked, to make it so that neither side in an edit war would "win" by getting the page locked to their side.
Instead, I was attacked for even trying to suggest it.
So here you go. A reasoned suggestion.
As for 3RR, better idea. If you're caught in 3RR, both you AND whoever you were reverting get blocked. That's supposed to be the policy as pertains to edit warring anyways, but no admin seems to give a rat's ass about policy when they can misquote it to give their POV warrior buddies a hand.
A. Nony Mouse