I am trying to get an arbitration ruling on this as part of Wik2. Better evidence that the vandal bot is actually Wik would be helpful.
Fred
From: "KNOTT, T" tknott@qcl.org.uk Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:36:36 +0100 To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] [wik1234@fastmail.fm: Quagga's vandalism]
No he is not hard banned for life. He will, however, probably get a
month >ban
the moment he comes back due to the fact that he broke the terms of his week-long ban a few times. That is in the enforcement section of our
(the >AC's)
ruling on the issue.
Violating a week long ban is one thing. Running a script to vandalize wikipedia repeatedly until we cave in for to his demands is something else. Assuming Jimbo posts the full header to confirm it wasn't faked, then I don't see we even need an AC ruling. This is simple vandalism. We block vandals all the time.
Theresa _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l