Consider the scenario where a disruptive user is indefinitely blocked on a particular wiki. He decides to have a "fresh start" in causing the same slow-paced disruption on all sister projects one by one...
All wikis are independent, yes. But when dealing with interwiki disruption, this should not get in the way of collaboration between wikis in dealing with disruptive users.
Interwiki vandals for example are promptly dealt with with or without this collaboration but other kinds of disruption, particularly slow paced ones need such collaboration.
We currently lack such a median and communication between wikis to deal with interwiki issues such as interwiki disruption.
- White Cat
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Marcus Buck me@marcusbuck.org wrote:
White Cat hett schreven:
Has there been any discussion on this matter? If a user is being
disruptive
on a wiki he or she will eventually end up getting blocked for it. If the same user decides to continue this disruption he was blocked for on other wikis, particularly sister projects, commons, meta and etc how should he
or
she be treated.
I know every wiki is independent. But letting a disruptive user become
the
source of agony on many wikis seems like a problematic thing to do.
- White CatThat should be decided by the projects he or she is disrupting, shouldn't it? If they feel being disrupted, they will block, if not they won't. Where do you see problems with this way of handling it?
Marcus Buck
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l