For the following writings, I am considering to ban 24 for 48 hours, starting Monday afternoon and going until Wednesday afternoon. This will be a warning, to be followed by our first-ever permanent ban if he doesn't behave.
Disagreements on meta.wikipedia.com, and about the content of articles, if restrained to the appropriate /talk page and appropriate normal struggle over the text of an article, are annoying but part of the process. Personal attacks, though, have no place in our community, particularly personal attacks which hint strongly at *physical* attacks.
I agree.
I think that one thing to do that's important, especially if 24 is banned, even temporarily, is that his meta-commentary get restored to the main page of meta. I can't think of any justification for moving everything he wrote in meta off the main page.
Is there one? Because it seems like those writings are being singled out without any clear explication of policy.
The below is preaching to the choir, I suspect, but I think it's important that this point be reiterated: The most important thing to do in the application and enforcement of policy and norms (from edits all the way to IP banning) is that the reasons for those actions are clearly delineated, so that even if mistakes are made, it's clear what they were, and if mistakes weren't made, false claims can be refuted.
--tc cunctator@kband.com