Jay JG wrote
If one has been making thousands of Wikipedia edits over months or years, it is almost inevitable that some edits or statements will seem questionable,
and
there is a belief that ArbCom will feel the need to sanction both sides to give the appearance of even-handedness. I'm not saying this is actually
the
case, but the belief is certainly out there, and the idea that "it's just not worth getting rid of troublemakers" has been expressed more than once.
After an extended period where the major criticism of the ArbCom was that it was slow to rule - now not the perceived difficulty - it is naturally the case that some other major points will be brought up.
Looking at this one, my reactions are:
- WP has lived with some proportion of difficult users, since its inception; - 'getting rid' of troublemakers is not the only approach; - if it is really being said that honest hard-working editors are being held to high standards of behaviour, then I think that is as it should be.
Perhaps there is a click of the ratchet, here. I hope it is towards a more civil place, for everyone.
Charles