Conrad Dunkerson wrote:

The 'first reverter' is NOT always the problem and 'discussion' does not cure all ills. I don't think I've ever seen a serious wheel war where discussion WASN'T going on.

Discussion does frequently develop, but usually it fails to involve both of the participants in the actual "war". If both sides were busy discussing instead of serially undoing each other's actions, then that problem wouldn't come up, and they'd hopefully be able to make progress in terms of resolving the underlying issue.

Unfortunately, the situation is sometimes aggravated by those who are late to the party, see that a dispute has come up, and decide to join in on the *action* rather than the *discussion*. Quite a bit of the userbox fiascos can be attributed to this, I think.

To prevent this, I think the obligation needs to fall on the original participants. If you've helped precipitate a dispute that has moved to discussion, in order for that discussion to mean anything you need to prevent people from actively perpetuating the dispute. Specifically, you should be stepping in when your would-be allies arrive, as those are people who ought to listen to you, telling them to stop and join the discussion instead.

--Michael Snow