But I have to respectfully disagree with both of you here-- do you really want to forbid newbies from contributing to anything controversial?
I still think things would have gone much better if the other users had not abused their power and had otherwise done what they were supposed to, _especially being more experienced users_. I think it would have been OK EVEN IF the subject is controversial. There are ways of dealing with controversy that don't involve censorship or inappropriate banning. And I'm sorry, I STILL don't see that I did anything wrong, at least nothing that wasn't done MORE wrong by the others (e.g. I could have started a discussion, but so could the others, and they had more reason to start one).
Just because I contribute something controversial does not give license to the others to behave the way they did. Does it?
???
James
On Fri, 25 Jun 2004, sannse wrote:
s> Charles worte: s> s> > > I think this case has said a lot about our community reaction to s> newbies, s> > > I'm seriously considering starting a Save the Newbie campaign here. s> > > s> > > --sannse s> s> > To be fair (though matters may have gone wrong here) newbies also need s> > saving from well-intentioned advice to start their time on WP, not logged s> > in, adding comments on American political topics that are divisive and s> > concerning divisiveness. The deep end. s> s> Yes, such advice to take things easy at first would be part of the s> policies of the RSPCN (with it's US branch of SPCN of course). Those s> who slide easily into the Wikipedia culture tend to be those who start s> by writing NPOV articles about fluffy kittens rather than those jumping s> in to the more... ummm... /active/ areas of the 'pedia. s> s> --sannse s> s> do we /have/ an article on [[Fluffy kitten]]s? s>