I disagree. If someone logs in with an offensive user name, then there is no reason to discuss the blocking. What is there to discuss? Ed didn't block the person, only the username. They can always log in again with a different user name. ~~~~
-----Original Message----- From: Optim [mailto:optim81@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 06 March 2004 08:49 To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocked user: Jesus Chirst
Summary: EdPoor blocked a user "Jesus Chirst".
My reply:
His/her username was the only reason for the block?
There was no discussion before the block?
If these two statements are true, then this user should get unblocked.
--Optim
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Isn't there a "red flag" list of blocked troll-tempting or obviously inflamatory usernames to head off future disputes?
-- David Speakman http://www.DavidSpeakman.com 501 Moorpark Way #83 Mountain View CA 94041 Phone: 408-348-1786
-----Original Message----- From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of KNOTT, T
I disagree. If someone logs in with an offensive user name, then there is no reason to discuss the blocking. What is there to discuss? Ed didn't block the person, only the username. They can always log in again with a different user name.
David Speakman wrote:
Isn't there a "red flag" list of blocked troll-tempting or obviously inflamatory usernames to head off future disputes?
It's impossible. The latest one was "Jesus Chirst" rather than "Jesus Christ". How many permutations can you cover? When such a name has been attempted, it should be kept in the user name file, but made inaccesible for use. Then if someone else tries to use the name he will receive a "Name already taken" message.
Ec
David Speakman wrote:
Isn't there a "red flag" list of blocked troll-tempting or obviously inflamatory usernames to head off future disputes?
I don't think so, really. It's sort of hard to come up with an a priori list, and such a list might actually lead to even more argument.
This is one of those areas where thoughtfulness, respect, care, love, and all that gooey stuff can work well to resolve a complex issue.
There's no huge freedom of expression issue with usernames, since username is not content. Usernames are a matter of living together in a co-operative community, and reasonableness all around is the way to go.
--Jimbo