RickK wrote:
At last count, Mr-Natural-Health had made personal attacks on 13 people. Is this violation of Wikiquette to be allowed to continue forever?
If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for being autocratic and unilateral.
But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button.
How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will you eliminate this nuisance for us?
Ed Poor, aka Unsolved Equation
Ed must be getting flustrated. Mr. Natural Health may soon agree to mediation and if he does not, a request for arbitration will be made which can probably be dealt with very promptly if he does not participate. I don't see any emergency.
Fred
From: "Poor, Edmund W" Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 09:32:05 -0500 To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Please ban Mr. Natural Health (was: Kill the puppy (was: Quacks Like a Duck))
RickK wrote:
At last count, Mr-Natural-Health had made personal attacks on 13 people. Is this violation of Wikiquette to be allowed to continue forever?
If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for being autocratic and unilateral.
But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button.
How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will you eliminate this nuisance for us?
Ed Poor, aka Unsolved Equation
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 01/22/04 14:32, Poor, Edmund W wrote:
If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for being autocratic and unilateral. But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button. How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will you eliminate this nuisance for us?
Speaking as one of those tangling with Mr-Natural-Health ... check his contributions list. He's writing articles that are good and useful, except for the (IMO) gross and overwhelming POV. (IMO, they're rants and/or advocacy, not encyclopaedia articles.) They have good material in them for articles, but that requires MNH not getting upset by the editing process.
It would be a loss for him to leave if he could play nicer than others.
I have been on Wikipedia about 2 seconds, so I may be hopelessly naive here.
- d.
On Thursday 22 January 2004 05:43 pm, David Gerard wrote:
On 01/22/04 14:32, Poor, Edmund W wrote:
If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for being autocratic and unilateral. But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button. How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will you eliminate this nuisance for us?
Speaking as one of those tangling with Mr-Natural-Health ... check his contributions list. He's writing articles that are good and useful, except for the (IMO) gross and overwhelming POV. (IMO, they're rants and/or advocacy, not encyclopaedia articles.) They have good material in them for articles, but that requires MNH not getting upset by the editing process.
It would be a loss for him to leave if he could play nicer than others.
What you're forgetting in your "usefulness calculation" is that people who engage in reversion wars and hopelessly POV edits waste a lot of time of other contributers.
That having been said, I take the approach that his contributions are not of interest in deciding whether or not he should be banned for repeatedly and after many warnings violating the "no personal attacks" rule.
Ceterum censeo, Carthaginem esse delendum.
Best, Sascha Noyes