LDan wrote:
Why is it necessary to restrict usernames? This seems like a pointless measure that could only loose us contributors.
I've already gone over this several times. Have you been reading the mailing list lately? Loosing contributors who want to have provocative and offensive user names would be a good thing since we already waste enough time with anonymous trolls.
So, if I did it again, you'd ban me? Even if all of my edits were OK?
You wasted a good deal of editing time from other contributors by your little stunt. If you keep doing that type of stuff, then yes.
You still haven't addressed my concern that this sets a dangerous precedent of banning someone while a discussion of whether or not to ban them was still going on.
Why or why do I have to address everything you write? I wasn't the person who banned your user account either. And it has since be un-banned when we found out it was you.
This wasn't even for vandalism or trolling, just for having an objectionable username.
Yes it was trolling.
-- mav
I've already gone over this several times. Have you been reading the mailing list lately? Loosing contributors who want to have provocative and offensive user names would be a good thing since we already waste enough time with anonymous trolls.
So far, we haven't heard of anyone leaving because of offensive usernames, and I doubt that there are any unnamed people who have left because of that.
Anonymous trolls are completely different. They make bad edits. People with bad usernames don't necessarily make bad edits.
You wasted a good deal of editing time from other contributors by your little stunt. If you keep doing that type of stuff, then yes.
The only time wasted was the 1 minute it took to write an opinion about it on the talk page (per person) and 30 seconds to ban. I don't think the subsequent mailing list discussion really counts.
Why or why do I have to address everything you write?
I guess it's inaccurate to say that if you don't respond to an accusation, it's either because it's true or you don't have any good argument against it, but that's what I thought.
I wasn't the person who banned your user account either. And it has since be un-banned when we found out it was you.
Well, I guess it wasn't just you, but still, this is the first time two people determining that a logged-in user should be banned is enough.
Yes it was trolling.
-- mav
None of wikipedia was more POV after I used that username. I didn't threaten anyone. How is it trolling? What is our definition of trolling? LDan
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
Daniel Ehrenberg littledanehren@yahoo.com wrote:
None of wikipedia was more POV after I used that username. I didn't threaten anyone. How is it trolling? What is our definition of trolling?
--- Well-- just catching up-- I would have hoped that such a stunt might gain you some perspective... maybe try ask Tim to *change your name to "Non-liberals are stupid" -- this might be a more serious experiment-- if thats what youre trying to do.
I agree with Mav-- creating a phony username just to try to make a point-- (I can only imagine you were bored out of your mind.) is trolling. A general definition of trolling to me-- is arguing when its beyond pointless-- Ive done it before-- theres nothing wrong with it-- but its perfectly fine for Mav (and now I ) to call it for what it is.
~S~
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search