Please forgive me if this has already been suggested; I only just subscribed to this list yesterday.
I think the 3-revert should be a guideline, with a direct warning on the user's talk page when it is violated. If the user continues to revert the page, and doesn't at that point start having a sane conversation about how to deal with the issue, then the person is being obsequious and uncommunicative and that is ample reason for a 24-hour ban.
moink
On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Bjorn Lindqvist wrote:
When *I* voted on that poll some week ago, the poll was about whether there should be a *guideline* that reads "do not do more than three reverts" or not. Nowhere on that page did it say that the poll really was about whether to allow admins to block a user that reverts three times or not.
Many of the 51+ persons that has voted probably did not either understand that the vote was about bannings. If that is what the vote is about and not just a guideline.
I share Bjorn's concern.
It's one thing to say that we have a very strong community guideline or norm that says 3 reverts in a day is enough. It's quite another thing to introduce an entirely new paradigm in which 24 hour bans are made for things that are not really emergency situations.
I'm not 100% opposed to the idea, but my foot dragging on making any sort of decree about this is grounded in the fact that I see this as a rather radical departure from past practice.
--Jimbo _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l