On 30/09/2007, Daniel R. Tobias <dan(a)tobias.name> wrote: Sounds like you're describing a wheel war. ArbCom is the way to go. The reblocking admins would be at least cautioned, and I doubt anything would happen to Linuxbeak. ArbCom would then decide once and forall whether or not to block. (Disclaimer: This reply is based purely on the parent email, I am not familiar with the incident in question.)

On 9/30/07, Daniel R. Tobias <dan(a)tobias.name> wrote: Looks to me like you dug through the entire history of Wikipedia, found one incident a fair number of people might be familiar with, and threw it out onto the floor without any elaboration or supporting arguments... Whatever point you're trying to make, I'm not sure. Is this a problem that would be unique to a particular system of banning/unbanning? Does this single incident illustrate a persistent problem? Is this anecdote the common scenario or an exception? Is there an alternative system which could reasonably be expected to reduce the amount of histrionics and mitigate the negative impacts of bandwagon politics? What, in particular, are the problems, here, and how might they be fixed? If we're relying on an anecdote, we may as well explore it a bit to see what information and lessons we can glean from it. Judging from the tone of your post, it sounds like you have an idea, or at least might be able to answer some of those questions. I'm not quite clear on what idea is, just yet? -Luna