http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress&a...
Disclaimer: This email is written in good faith.
There is a user who is removing their own reports from the Vandalism in progress page. This user was listed yesterday for reverting a page at least 5 times. The reverting was not removing vandalism but was asserting a POV. As far as I am aware, this user should have been blocked for 24 hours, but it does not appear this happened.
By the way, this user is also a sysop, but should this make a difference? This is a serious question.
Regards, Edmund
At 01:51 PM 12/4/2004 +0000, R E Broadley wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress&a...
Disclaimer: This email is written in good faith.
There is a user who is removing their own reports from the Vandalism in progress page. This user was listed yesterday for reverting a page at least 5 times. The reverting was not removing vandalism but was asserting a POV. As far as I am aware, this user should have been blocked for 24 hours, but it does not appear this happened.
By the way, this user is also a sysop, but should this make a difference? This is a serious question.
I see nothing in the 3RR policy that exempts sysops; the three revert rule is said to apply to "persons" and sysops would seem to fall under that category. So IMO sysops are bound by it too - and rightly so.
However, banning a sysop is a little problematic in that they can simply un-ban themselves. IMO, unbanning oneself after being banned for legitimate reasons should be considered an abuse of sysop powers; unless there are extenuating circumstances of some kind I don't expect such a person would remain a sysop for long.
I know that I, for one, am quite ready and willing to hand out 24 bans now that the 3RR is enforceable. It may just take a little time for this knowledge to percolate out to the general population of sysops.