[WikiEN-l] too many edits???

[Stevertigo]

Jimbo wrote: they want to work on
| wikipedia.  So they come back under a new username and actually behave
| completely.  There's nothing we can do about that, and it isn't a problem
| anyway.


The above is a textbook example of defacto-practicality - minimum wasted
energy, maximum effectiveness.

What I think this also means, (Excuse me if this has all been said before)
is that people shouldnt be too keen on looking for phantoms, or to call
someone a Lir.  If one gives themselves away, then this should be reported -
in a formal way, and the ban would be automatically extended to the new
identity.

People ought not be so quick to jump to calling for a ban before there is
conclusive evidence.  *The *very *first *mention of a case should be
*conclusive, *well detailed, and practically *incontrovertible.  Its like
cops calling someone a rapist without enough proof to convict - theyd be
sued for libel.  Cops just gather evidence, only reporting it to a
prosecutor when theres enough of it.  Then theres a quick and speedy trial.

The case for banning is then based not on particular behaviours,  rather
these collected behaviours (if well documented ) can serve as evidence of
that persons true identity.  In more blatant cases, of course, this is all
somehwat moot, but keeping to the established, orderly *due process ought to
save everyone some stress, and quiet the critics of ban enforcement - who
really only call for some deliberate, maturely conducted process. There are
advantages to both informality and formality.

History lesson: Formal democratic ways developed from the popular need to
surpass royal Law, which ultimately tended to be 'at a king's (or queens)
discretion.'

IMHO
-Stevert