David Gerard wrote:
steven l. rubenstein (rubenste(a)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.