I agree with Anthere and Axel on this, and I think they are talking past each other. The issue here is rewarding bad behavior sporadically -- that's a good way -- the best way I can think of -- to get lots and lots more bad behavior out of someone.
So, it isn't really similar to decisions about candy.
--Jimbo
Anthere wrote:
--- Axel Boldt axelboldt@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Daniel Ehrenberg littledanehren@yahoo.com wrote:
well that doesn't prohibit unrevereting of his
good edits, does it?
The owner of the site has declared that Michael is not allowed to make edits on Wikipedia, good or bad. Lacking the technical means to enforce this ban, we have decided to try a soft ban. It would be nice if you didn't subvert those efforts.
A little analogy: suppose you had a child who keeps screaming for sweets. You have three options: 1) always give in 2) sometimes give in 3) never give in. Option 2 is by far the worst.
Axel
I ***strongly*** disagree. I think a kid who keeps screaming for sweets is asking for more than sweets. The solution is certainly not either to never give or to always give. A sensible way is to understand why he is screaming, to make him understand that things are not received always when one scream for them. But *never* indulging someone for craving for attention or sweets is *really* bad imho. Option 1 and 3 are by the worst option. Mother point of view. My kids are perfectly equilibrated kids, with good teeths, and very few tantrums. Indulgement from time to time does not spoil. Strict behavior ruin spirit.
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l