my rationale is that small communities don't need
many policies and rules but large communities
tend to use them more because they need the
policies.
As wikipedia becomes more popular, we will face
new problems and new trollying behaviour that we
will need to fight. We can build the policy from
before so that we can be ready when the problem
arises. We already have ~200K articles. As we
grow, we may attract more troublemakers too.
unfortunately... in a large community it is
difficult not to use policies and rules.
the proposed prohibition is not meant to limit
individuality and personal creative expression
but to make the life difficult for people who may
use "masked" usernames as a means of creating
some confusion etc.
--Optim
--- Anthere <anthere8(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
Optim a �crit:
yes we need flexibility.
As I said the proposed prohibition seeks to
prevent malicious behaviour and not to make
our
life difficult.
many people "mask" their usernames but they
don't
have malicious intention. Most of them use
the
same "mask" all the time.
If we can have a consensus that a policy
regarding "masked" usernames is needed, we
can
start discussing the details and formulate
the
policy so that it will be flexible and will
not
make our life difficult.
Also, nobody will be "prosecuted" until the
policy will be in effect. And of course the
policy should be well-formulated in order to
avoid misunderstandings and "prosecution" of
non-malicious users.
How could we distinguish malicious from
non-malicious behaviour with a formulated
policy
(i.e. without human judgement) ?
--Optim
I think that a policy here would be
inappropriate. Common sense is
appropriate. Please, do not turn Wikipedia in
something worse that
french administration. Too many policies, kill
the policies that really
matter :-)
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!