We have many times discussed the idea of self-expiring (or temporary bans). That is the plan I have always favored. I think a 3-day or one-month ban on a problematic user has the potential to persuade them to "join us" rather than trying to "beat us".
Banning policy is 100% in the hands of Jimbo, the site owner. He apparently favors permanent bans. Since he has the ultimate responsibility for the project I hate to second-guess him; but I've made my views known.
I spend the bulk of my Wiki-time working on NPOV issues and trying to get my fellow contributors to work together in a spirit of harmony. I'm not sure how well I'm doing, but I occasionally get a thank-you on my talk page. ^_^
Ed Poor
-----Original Message----- From: Daniel Ehrenberg [mailto:littledanehren@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 4:04 PM To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] blocking vandals
Maybe, when blocking someone, we should put a cookie on their computer that doesn't let them edit under any username or IP adress. I know this could be a breach of privacy, so maybe it could expire in a week. It would be easy to get around, just a deterent. (just as it is easy to get around blocking usernames)
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
Banning policy is 100% in the hands of Jimbo, the site owner. He apparently favors permanent bans. Since he has the ultimate responsibility for the project I hate to second-guess him; but I've made my views known.
Actually, I support the idea of automatically expiring bans fully. I am not generally in favor of permanent bans. There could be exceptions, but usually the point is to ban someone until they get a grip on themselves.
Not long ago, I suggested that the software be updated so that bans can have an expiration date. But beggars can't be choosers, so it's up to the active developers to implement that.
Also, short-term bans, for a week or month say, would likely be less controversial generally, so we wouldn't have to sweat them as much.
--Jimbo
Perminant cookies would work, I'm just fundimentally opposed to them (actually, they would expire in 2038 (the end of the Unix Epoch) but that's different.). Jimbo- I think temporary bans would help for the reason Ed stated (but I accidentally deleted). Perminant cookies are like spyware on someone's computer, whereas temporary cookies are like little temporary placeholders (I never was any good at anologies). Sorry for my slight randomness. --LittleDan "Poor, Edmund W" Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com wrote:Banning policy is 100% in the hands of Jimbo, the site owner. He apparently favors permanent bans. Since he has the ultimate responsibility for the project I hate to second-guess him; but I've made my views known.
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!