On 02/11/05, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

What is the policy on other Wikipedias concerning unblocking users. In particular, does a sysop have the right to unblock an IP another sysop blocked, if he thinks the block was unreasonably long?

Was this a general question, or are you interested in particular examples?

A general question. There's discussion about this between the Dutch sysops. One person has unblocked some addresses, I have done the same before. Others get angry about that because we did not discuss our action with the sysop who did the blocking before we unblocked. They say it shows that we distrust the sysop who did the blocking

It depends on the unblocking

01:00 01/11/05 One_Admin blocks 127.0.0.1 for a year (silliness) 01:05 01/11/05 Another_Admin unblocks 127.0.0.1 (a year is too long)

versus

01:00 01/11/05 One_Admin blocks 127.0.0.1 for a year (silliness) 01:05 01/11/05 Another_Admin unblocks 127.0.0.1 (a year is too long) 01:10 01/11/05 One_Admin blocks 127.0.0.1 for a week (silliness)

versus

01:00 08/11/05 One_Admin blocks 127.0.0.1 for a year (silliness) 01:05 08/11/05 Another_Admin unblocks 127.0.0.1 (a year is too long)

The first is something that is likely to get people annoyed - it's removing the block completely because the first one was too long. The second is pragmatic - essentially "correcting" the length of the block. The third ditto; a week has passed, so correcting the length of the block essentially means "letting them off now" (a bit like courts will sometimes sentence someone to X months in prison, and then declare they've spent it whilst waiting for the trial, so they can walk free)

The latter two cases are more defensible than the first - contesting the length isn't contesting the ban itself - but in all cases it'd be polite to let the blocking admin know what you've done and why. That's common form as I've seen it on en., anyway...

-- - Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk