Dr. Duffy wrote: "Much of what went on was simply Robert-baiting and anti-Robertism. That does not make it right, but it is wrong to attach religious or ethnic connotations to what has been going on. There have been cases of jew-baiting on wiki, a few cases, and I have blocked on the most recent culprits and called for the banning of another."
This is highly quotable. May I? While I agree with nearly everything James has said, I disagree that EofT deserves banning. Punishing one child and not the other is a typical manifestation of lopsided parenting
- usually resulting in a
great despartity between how they are each treated, and consequently how they each continue to behave. Banning EofT, despite his rudeness, and inability to take good sound advice -- and not banning RK -- in all fairness, would only exacerbate the percieved problems of rampant anti-Semitism and philo-Semitism on Wikipedia.
While one may deserve the other, and while the rest of the world may deserve neither, this does not mean that misplaced force will ever solve anything. Of course, HL Mencken disagreed: "Hanging one scoundrel, it appears, does not deter the next. Well, what of it? The first one is at least disposed of." But then so many good turn of the century commentarians were speechless after 1945. Will Rodgers... Harry Truman, etc. etc.
-S-
I understand your point and I do believe that Robert's behaviour is seriously wrong. However I have to say that EoT's behaviour, specifically his creating of some many abusive /pages/, not merely fights on pages, way crosses the line of acceptable behaviour. RK's behaviour is no justification for EoT's response, which breaks just about every rule of wikiettique imaginable. EoT has been repeatedly asked to stop creating these pages, and has refused to do so. Jimbo has made it clear that he HAS to stop, yet he has continued with the behaviour. In the circumstances I see no alternative but to ban EoT. /Any/ user who acted in that manner in my view forfeits the right to be on wikipedia.
RK's behaviour is grossly unacceptable and needs to be confronted also. Wrong as his behaviour has been, in tone and context, however, at least he has not created a whole stream of abusive personalised subpages about his opponents, which to my mind is a worse offence. With EoT out of the way, Jimbo also needs to get tough with RK and warn him that his behaviour is unacceptable and MUST stop.
I was not casting judgments on the nature of the abuse by both men against the other and treating one as worse than the other, merely observing the fact that one user, EoT, used a methodology that is unprecedented in wiki history and is so far beyond the realm of acceptable behaviour that it beggars belief. The sheer scale of that offence and consistent refusal to stop requires nothing short of a ban.
JT
_________________________________________________________________ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
RK's behaviour is no justification for EoT's response, which breaks just about every rule of wikiettique imaginable.
Ettiquette? Hm. I wonder what reception an Arab Palestinian editor with RK's level of "ettiquette" might recieve. Oh yes-- you and I reverted some of his "edits" recently didnt we?
EoT has been repeatedly asked to stop creating these pages, and has refused to do so. Jimbo has made it clear that he HAS to stop, yet he has continued with the behaviour. In the circumstances I see no alternative but to ban EoT. /Any/ user who acted in that manner in my view forfeits the right to be on wikipedia.
If this is true then I agree with you. As I understand it, it is not currently the case. The only edits EofT seems to be making regarding RK are to the ridiculous "case" page, which I made to replace and remove those invasive pages EofT started.
The precedent for /ban pages was already set and was a bad practice ready to be missapplied -- its important to clear this up. After Jims "suggestion" that /ban pages were inappropriate, and EofT's refusal to heed this "suggestion" -- yes, certainly, EofT is on his own.
RK's behaviour is grossly unacceptable and needs to be confronted also.
Well? Tick, tock, tick, tock... the general heavyweights may seem to go in favor of banning EofT -- are they doing it at the request of RK -- a person whos behaviour is also "grossly unacceptible?" Wherefore comes this momentum for taking unilateral action that favors one miscreant over another? What would Judge Judy do? Throw them both out, I imagine.
EoT, used a *methodology that is unprecedented in wiki history and is so far beyond the realm of acceptable behaviour...
The *methodology you speak of -- /ban pages, and the creation of excess pages on the matter, although unusual, did have plenty of precedent, as this was the method that other "trolls" were "informed" and "documented" as to their status -- while still active.
Continuing the "Big City Smartass" tradition, -S-
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com