David Gerard wrote:
steven l. rubenstein (rubenste@ohiou.edu) [050206 07:25]:
Fred Bauder points out that what I suggest amounts to a permanent ban. Yes, this is precisely what I mean. I understand that many people might disagree with me, but this is the effect of what I proposed. If Jimbo rejects it, so be it. But to reiterate, what I am suggesting should only be used in the most extreme cases, and after some sort of due process.
We only give up to a year's ban, because a year is forever in Internet time.
Also - and this is important - all banned users are theoretically redeemable. Michael was turned form a swearword into a good editor. If that particular miracle can happen, anything is possible.
Michael's behaviour was clearly (to me, at least) a symptom of some sort of emotional or psychological issue. The people I'm worried about are just malicious.
But the main point that I share with Nicholas Knight: "It's just going to get worse, and as legitimate users get fed up and leave, people like CD will turn Wikipedia into a laughing stock."
CD is the merest flea on Wikipedia. And we're already a laughing stock, ask
CD is just the current convenient example of a larger problem that desperately needs fixed.
Larry Sanger.
Larry's recent rant really isn't at issue here.