Lame, yes.
Worth blocking over?
Erm. No.
-Snowspinner On Jun 20, 2005, at 5:41 PM, Dan Grey wrote:
Granted Rick's actions were attempting to keep a possible copyvio out of WP, but revert warring with other respected users was a pretty lame way to go about it. It was not going to resolve the GAP project copyvio problem.
Dan
On 20/06/05, Phil Sandifer sandifer@sbcglobal.net wrote:
The rules do not have any innate value. That is to say, the mere fact that something is in the rules does not make it right, any more than its absence from the rules makes it wrong. Sysops are not expected to be mechanical robots in enforcing the 3RR or any other rule. This doesn't mean people are above the rules. It means that sysops are not obliged to block in every case.
One of the things that should always play into a decision about blocking is the good faith of the contributor, the necessity of the block in getting the point across, and the nature of the dispute. Frankly, Rick's block wasn't cut and dry - removing copyvio absolutely should not count as a 3RR revert, and there's no reason to think that Rick did not sincerely see a copyvio problem. And it's important to err on the side of protecting Wikipedia from lawsuit with copyvio - if there's a reasonable suspicion, remove first, then spend the time sorting it out.
Which isn't to say that Rick handled this well. He didn't. it is, however, to say that he did not handle it so badly as to deserve the abject slap in the face that this block was. And he's right to be pissed - I would be.
I hope Silsor intends to spend a LOT more time than he has browsing recent changes and dealing with the abject stupidity that Rick was our first line of defense against. Because otherwise, that block just hurt the project a lot.
-Snowspinner _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l