I don't think anyone should be on auto-revert, with one exception.
Because: * Auto-revert can lose good changes, along with the bad. * Auto-revert provides no possibility for contributor improvement. * Auto-revert is just plain mean.
Exception: * Someone who signs in and then starts doing precisely what would get an 'IP user' banned
But even the lone exception is an emergency measure, until the sysop can contact a Developer (I'm thinking of mav and the 'MIT vandal').
If someone keeps breaking the rules, we need to give them a period of banning (what in my Uncle Ed incarnation I would call a "time out"). After the period expires, they can apologize suitably and resume as if nothing had ever happened (except people might watch them a bit more closely).
I'm pretty sure a temporary ban, such as I just described, is in accordance with Jimbo's policy.
Ed Poor
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
I don't think anyone should be on auto-revert, with one exception.
Because:
- Auto-revert can lose good changes, along with the bad.
- Auto-revert provides no possibility for contributor improvement.
- Auto-revert is just plain mean.
I quite agree. but Susan Mason has yet to aplogize and be welcomed back to our little bunch of collegiately-spirited editors.
he is still banned, but is getting around that by virtue of an AOL IP which we apear to be unable to block. auto-revert is the human being equivalent of the IP block which is already in place.