I blocked a user whose handle is "Jesus Chirst".
It should be self-evident that this is an unacceptable user name.
I feel very strongly about this, and I feel my action though unilateral is justified. Our username policy is clear.
If his aim is to contribute to the encyclopedia, he can pick a less provocative user name. If he has some other name, then he has no right to register at all.
I expect Mav and Jimbo to back me up on this, or my vacation will be permanent.
Ed Poor Bureaucrat
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I blocked a user whose handle is "Jesus Chirst".
I presume that "Chirst" is a creative misspelling on the part of the user rather than a typo by Ed. :-)
It should be self-evident that this is an unacceptable user name.
Although I am personally not bothered by this kind of name choice, I do view the credibility of such users as suspect. I also recognize that many other members find it offensive.
I feel very strongly about this, and I feel my action though unilateral is justified. Our username policy is clear.
If his aim is to contribute to the encyclopedia, he can pick a less provocative user name. If he has some other name, then he has no right to register at all.
I expect Mav and Jimbo to back me up on this, or my vacation will be permanent.
As much as I may understand your views on this issue, I find your threat at the end to be an overreaction. These incidents are not new to Wikipedia, and they tend to work their way through the system without the need for threats from senior users. The threat is unbecoming of a right-wingerr whom even unapologetic leftists have come to respect.
Ec
Nikola Smolenski wrote:
On Friday 05 March 2004 15:29, Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I blocked a user whose handle is "Jesus Chirst".
It should be self-evident that this is an unacceptable user name.
What if that is his real name?
If it is, then that's fine. There are many other possibilities that would make it o.k., too.
But let's be realistic here. It was most likely chosen just to be flamboyant and to yank some people's chains. It's not asking too much of someone to ask them to pick a different name.
One nice thing about being a small community of reasonable people is that we don't *need* to have "hard and fast" rules that are ruthlessly enforced by a "blind" bureaucracy to the point of absurdity. We can just be sensible and kind, and that'll be enough.
--Jimbo
He was also spending all of his time writing nonsense on user pages and otherwise not contributing.
RickK
"Poor, Edmund W" Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote: I blocked a user whose handle is "Jesus Chirst".
It should be self-evident that this is an unacceptable user name.
I feel very strongly about this, and I feel my action though unilateral is justified. Our username policy is clear.
If his aim is to contribute to the encyclopedia, he can pick a less provocative user name. If he has some other name, then he has no right to register at all.
I expect Mav and Jimbo to back me up on this, or my vacation will be permanent.
Ed Poor Bureaucrat
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster.
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I blocked a user whose handle is "Jesus Chirst".
It should be self-evident that this is an unacceptable user name.
I feel very strongly about this, and I feel my action though unilateral is justified. Our username policy is clear.
If his aim is to contribute to the encyclopedia, he can pick a less provocative user name. If he has some other name, then he has no right to register at all.
I agree with this.
I expect Mav and Jimbo to back me up on this, or my vacation will be permanent.
I'm uncomfortable with "Do X or I'm leaving" rhetoric. I actually think that it undermines good arguments in favor of X, by making it seem like a power play.
--Jimbo