Toby wrote:
The same goes for comments on talk pages, edit summaries, and, yes, even usernames.
Which are still covered by our etiquette and usernames polices. If somebody makes a pest of themselves and wastes our time and energy that would otherwise go into creating an encyclopedia, then they must change or leave for the good of the project. And this /whole/ episode has misdirected a great deal of time and effort that would otherwise have gone into creating content.
As Martin said about our volunteer effort: "But with that work comes responsibility."
Choosing a username that offends is not a responsible thing to do.
User names should only play a nominative role, not a provocative one where slogans, insults and POV statements reign free.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Daniel Mayer wrote:
User names should only play a nominative role, not a provocative one where slogans, insults and POV statements reign free.
They're only provocative to those who want to be provoked. There's too much silly whining just because some don't like another's name.
Maveric149 wrote:
Toby Bartels wrote:
The same goes for comments on talk pages, edit summaries, and, yes, even usernames.
Which are still covered by our etiquette and usernames polices.
Yes, usernames are covered by the usernames policies. I'm not advocating some weird situation is that is not true! I'm really having a hard time trying to figure out what you mean here.
If somebody makes a pest of themselves and wastes our time and energy that would otherwise go into creating an encyclopedia, then they must change or leave for the good of the project. And this /whole/ episode has misdirected a great deal of time and effort that would otherwise have gone into creating content.
Well, /that/ is certainly true!!! And a good reason why the entire matter of Drolsi's name ought to have been ignored by the community entirely. Not because Drolsi's name was good -- I think that it was bad. (I reiterate this point, even though I've said it numerous times, because you seem to think otherwise below.) But because we have better things to do than to bother with it.
As Martin said about our volunteer effort: "But with that work comes responsibility." Choosing a username that offends is not a responsible thing to do. User names should only play a nominative role, not a provocative one where slogans, insults and POV statements reign free.
I have agreed with all of this from the very beginning. That is so completely not my point.
It is a great fallacy to believe that everything that is wrong should be forbidden. Such a principle is the antithesis of freedom. Wikipedia, for the most part, does not accept this principle; and the wiki way, in the broad sense, denies it utterly. I shouldn't have to point that out to you, but I do; because otherwise I can't see how you could have believed that quoting Martin was the least bit relevant.
-- Toby