[WikiEN-l] No more blocking people for who they *are*?

W. Guy Finley wgfinley at dynascope.com
Wed Feb 8 01:05:16 UTC 2006

On 2/7/06 5:54 PM, "wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org"
<wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org> wrote:

> From: Delirium <delirium at hackish.org>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 18:58:03 -0500
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] No more blocking people for who they *are*?
> W. Guy Finley wrote:
>> What is staring to kill me is that people feel hey have a RIGHT to edit
>> Wikipedia.  Editing Wikipedia is a privilege and if you demonstrate you're a
>> dolt and can't handle that then there should be no question your ability to
>> edit should be revoked for a set period of time or indefinitely.  We're
>> talking about a user here who's vast majority of time has been spent putting
>> all the "funny" boxes on his user page and embarrassing the good name of a
>> rock and roll legend.
> I don't think anyone is arguing that there is a fundamental right to
> edit Wikipedia.  Rather, the claim is that Wikipedia's mission of
> writing a neutral, high-quality encyclopedia is not well served by
> excessive policing of users to cull the ones who express opinions deemed
> "embarrassing".  It seems more useful to limit banning to the cases
> where a user is actually disrupting the process of writing an
> encyclopedia, e.g. by edit-warring or spamming.
> -Mark

Stupendous, molesting children is "embarrassing".  Don't think I could have
seen a bigger understatement or marginalization of the issue all day.  This
just in "American Bishops Find Pedophiliac Priests to be 'embarrassing'"
Yeah, that would go over well.

Oh, and how is a wheel war amongst several admins, intervention by Jimbo and
a speedy arb case NOT considered a disruption?  All of this because a few
people thought something as sick as this was funny.

--Guy  (User:Wgfinley)

More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list