David and Erik,
I must respectfully disagree with your belief that we need stronger global blocking. Each community should set its own behavior standards, not have them imposed from above. Just because we consider a person a troll on one project does not automatically make them a troll on other projects.
I oppose the creation of the breaching experiment and usage of Wikiversity as a platform to break the rules of another project but that is a matter that must be handled at the local level. I am fully confident that the community of Wikiversity will be able to effectively handle this situation on their own.
It was unnecessary for Jimbo to personally intervene, rather than simply file a complaint and follow the accepted process. Just because Jimbo is the founder does not mean that he is an unquestionable authority on every single project.
Geoffrey
________________________________ From: David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, March 19, 2010 12:44:30 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity
On 19/03/2010, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
It's heartbreaking to see how a small project can be disrupted by a tiny number of well-known problem users, and IMO a strong argument for using more global blocking processes. Small projects often think they need to give people "fresh start" opportunities because they're otherwise not going to grow, but that's a bad bargain - introducing toxic personalities into a fledgling community is a certain way to bring about its decline.
Indeed. Note that the same sort of troll adoption nearly got en:wq taken out and shot last year.
- d.
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l