Regarding temporary bans,
How much trouble would it be to create a timed ban?
I imagine such bans could be called Cool Off Periods of say 12, 24, 36, or 72 hours, both parties in an edit war being banned for the same amount of time, so that neither feels the W has sided with the other party?
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
This is an disingenous coming from one who regularly engages in aggressive reverting when it suits his purposes and sees Wikipedia as a medium for political struggle.
Bans ought not to become a weapon in edit wars.
Fred
Regarding temporary bans,
How much trouble would it be to create a timed ban?
I imagine such bans could be called Cool Off Periods of say 12, 24, 36, or 72 hours, both parties in an edit war being banned for the same amount of time, so that neither feels the W has sided with the other party?
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--- Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
This is an disingenous coming from one who regularly engages in aggressive reverting when it suits his purposes and sees Wikipedia as a medium for political struggle.
Not sure where that came from. Do you perhaps have me confused with someone else?
Bans ought not to become a weapon in edit wars.
I agree. It would be a means for admins to send a message, yet be a light sentence (like a misdemeanor).
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
--- Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com wrote:
I imagine such bans could be called Cool Off Periods of say 12, 24, 36, or 72 hours, both parties in an edit war being banned for the same amount of time, so that neither feels the W has sided with the other party?
72 hours, by the way is what is called a "5150" in California http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/appndxa/welfinst/welin5150.htm
I would say that cooling off periods, if they are too short, will be used less seriously, and as such might cause more problems than they solve-- look at how Axel took it upon himself to reverse Erik's ban-- long before any meaningful consensus had arrived onlist. In light of the fact that this is a world wide operation, a full day should not be unreasonable for a minimum ban.
BTW, the only inappropriate thing done in that whole ban thing was Axel's lifting of Erik's ban, done in good faith, and with unquestionably good cause. My last word on that.
~S~
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
--- Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com wrote:
Regarding temporary bans,
How much trouble would it be to create a timed ban?
I imagine such bans could be called Cool Off Periods of say 12, 24, 36, or 72 hours, both parties in an edit war being banned for the same amount of time, so that neither feels the W has sided with the other party?
I don't think that's a good idea. Edit wars are completely different than vandalism because it's just one page. I think that our current policy of protecting the page is sufficient. If it were possible for developers to make it so that a particular sysop couldn't edit a page, I think that would help, but a situation where this would be needed hasn't come up yet. Cool off bans for [multipage] trolls and vandals, IMO, would be good. LDan
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
--- Daniel Ehrenberg littledanehren@yahoo.com wrote:
I don't think that's a good idea. Edit wars are completely different than vandalism because it's just one page. I think that our current policy of protecting the page is sufficient. If it were possible for developers to make it so that a particular sysop couldn't edit a page, I think that would help, but a situation where this would be needed hasn't come up yet. Cool off bans for [multipage] trolls and vandals, IMO, would be good.
I was looking to what happens when the page in edit-war has been locked yet the belligerent parties start mashing all over each other in other pages, such as talk pages, user pages, etc.
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com
I was looking to what happens when the page in edit-war has been locked yet the belligerent parties start mashing all over each other in other pages, such as talk pages, user pages, etc.
===== Christopher Mahan
It's possible to protect user pages and talk pages too, isn't it? I think that's a much better solution than banning the user. LDan
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com