Before a "short ban" would be considered the editor would have lost an arbitration dispute. How about some creative alternatives to bans as results? For example, an editor may only be having trouble in certain areas, for example, Fred Bauder, should he lose an arbitration might be forbidden from editing any philosophy articles....
Fred
From: Bjorn Lindqvist bjrn.lindqvist@telia.com Reply-To: bjrn.lindqvist@telia.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:03:01 +0100 To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Banning for a day, hi to Cunc
I think no one should be short banned without a clear process and global agreement upon using this sort of action. Currently, we do not know who could decide of such an action, and we do not have any arguments laid down. Plus we confuse "short ban" as a mean to cool down the editor, "short ban" as a mean to give a break to the group, and "short ban" as a way to get around due process.
Or "short ban" as a means to publicly and wikipedia-globally humiliate someone and declare that person to be "wrong"? Short bans are a bad idea.
BL _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l