Rick wrote:
Are you saying you are prepared to ban a user because
you are having
an edit war with him? That is MOST DEFINITELY an abuse of your sysop
powers, and should cause YOU to be instantly banned.
That isn't what he said, actually. (I know I'm a few days late, just
back from a wedding, so maybe what I'm about to say has already been
said.)
Erik has proposed that Jtdirl's actions on the Mother Theresa article
were of the sort that, in his view, ought to lead us to consider a ban
of Jtdirl. Not having yet reviewed the whole conflagration, I can't
say for sure, but I'm rather inclined to suppose that I would not
agree with that assessment.
I prefer for people to not be very quick at all to rush to the notion
that a ban is the proper solution for a problem. And that's why we
are headed toward a system where formal mediation is the "first final
step".
Particularly for longtime contributors like Jtdirl and Erik, both of
whom know and accept the NPOV policy as foundational, it strikes me as
very unlikely that we'll be unable to produce an article that both
find satisfactory.
The process of getting to that version may be a bit rough and tumble
at times, of course. It might occassionally, and regrettably, involve
some heated words. But as long as we all remain passionately and
lovingly committed to the overarching ideal of neutrality, we can see
effective progress made.
--Jimbo