"Steve Bennett" wrote
We seem to have already lost faith in our users that they can make reasonable decisions for themselves. (Assuming you agree with the userboxes are evil line of thinking)
I wouldn't see it like that. There have always been some tensions around: e.g. get on and write the 'Pedia versus having a public life here, to name one which is not so contentious and where it is kind of obvious we need both. Equally we do need both of the wiki open door, and the right to throw a few disruptive users back on the street.
What happens when things get out of kilter? We seem to have reached a stage where the granting of permissions, which is at the heart of the wiki way, is in tension with the assertion of rights. Everyone here knows that the permission to write on a page is quite distinct from the right to have your POV on the page; this is Wikipedia 101. The permission to write on one's user page, together with the right to veto anyone else's contributions there, is not a right 'of free speech' on a user page. If people are making decisions based on some assumed right of that kind, they are just completely wrong. This is not a feasible policy for Wikipedia. The fact is that user pages are not policed, except in egregious cases. That is not a reason to be confused about the basic situation.
Charles