"Daniel Ehrenberg" littledanehren@yahoo.com wrote in message news:20030531230332.77432.qmail@web41809.mail.yahoo.com...
I don't think the blanket reverting efforts directed at Michael are good. I went through the contrabutions of 24.130.213.24x (those of you reverting know who I'm talking about) and many, if not most, of his edits were useful and even factual. I will be un-reverting all of his useful edits, but only after fact checking. --LittleDan
Do not un-revert. Jimmy Wales made it quite clear what he expects us to do about Michael, in a message to this list only yesterday (in my time zone). Here's what he said:
"Jimmy Wales" jwales@bomis.com wrote in message news:20030530183331.C27690@joey.bomis.com...
Dante Alighieri wrote:
This is an open request, but it is specifically aimed at Jimbo. Can we
have
a clear and definitive answer on Michael and his pseudonyms and
his/their
ban status?
Michael and all his derivatives are banned from Wikipedia. Sysops and developers can take whatever steps are necessary to make this technologically effective.
Also, can this be posted on the Wikipedia so that it can be easily linked to?
I assume this email message, via the archvies, will be sufficient.
The current situation requires that we direct people to Michael's ban talk page and that they then link to the No-Fx page and
the
Weezer pages. I am, as are others, spending too much time defending our actions when we delete Michael's garbage. Thanks.
He's banned, and if he wants to be unbanned, he can email me for a friendly chat, or join the mailing list to state his case.
--Jimbo