>>: Re: [Foundation-l] And blocked again

[sannse]

Walter van Kalken wrote:

 > [a reply in anger]

As I've been saying to Waerth on IRC - David was really trying to give 
advice here and not to offend.  I've been hearing about this situation 
for a while now, and understand Waerth's deep frustration and anger. 
But it's new and rather peculiar sounding to most here I think.

This situation with his provider is quite different from the one most 
people will have - but perhaps can be compared with a random user trying 
to persuade AOL to change its whole system because the user can't access 
a site they want to see.  His provider simply isn't going to listen - 
however much sense he makes with reasons that proxies are a Bad Thing. 
And, as Waerth has said, he has no option of changing provider.

Waerth has had to put up with regular blocks for a long time through no 
fault of his own.  I think any of us wiki-addicts would be as upset at this.

I don't know what the solution is, except for ja. being asked to change 
their policy here.  I don't see why the blocking system cannot be told 
to ignore this particular set (although I don't know the technicalities 
of course).  Note that these blocks are *not* in response to vandalism - 
proxies are blocked automatically even if no bad edits have come from 
that address.  Waerth is an excellent contributor, active in foundation 
issues as well as local issues, it's a real shame to see him distressed 
by this problem.

--sannse


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 14/02/05