Sure - the power to ban simple vandals, users named
for identity deception, people abusing other users
etc. But a user whose username has a word in it that a
banned user also had, but has an innocuous and
generally productive edit history? LT is far from a
vandal, and has not engaged in any disruptive behavior
that I can see.
Mark
--- Fennec Foxen <fennec(a)gmail.com> wrote:
<cut> The point where this
boundary becomes fuzzy
is the cutting edge of Recent Changes, where it is
clear that the
community has decided that vandalism is bad and
vandals should be
blocked after being warned, but it's not entirely
clear who is a
vandal and what is vandalism (in some cases). Moving
further away from
this idealized little circle, we find the newly
registered-for-trivial-vandalism username, simple
trolls wanting
trouble (naming themselves to confuse themselves
with sysops, for
example), and it continues on from there. Some of
the actions taken in
this area are not so much against policy as outside
of policy, while
some are clearly disallowed.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com