[WikiEN-l] Before reverting blanking, please read the text

[Gregory Maxwell]

On 10/19/06, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> I'm also wondering why it isn't "ABSOLUTELY INEXCUSABLE" for the human
> who originally blanked the article to be acting in a manner that's no
> more intelligent than a bot as well. We grant newbies a lot of slack,
> and we grant the aggrieved victims of libel even more slack, but if the
> inexcusability of this is really absolute then in this case the original
> blanker is just as much in the wrong.
>
> Can we tone down the hyperbole a bit?

Lets trade, I'll stop being offended by how lazy some of our
anti-vandalism video game players are when the rest of the folks in
the thread stop making excuses for them.

As to why we'd hold bots to a different standard than humans: Bots
don't have brains, humans do... If you are mindlessly reverting
vandalism in a manner no more effective than what a bot could, should,
and would do then you are doing nothing more than needlessly pumping
your edit count.

I've substantiated my position, but I've yet to see a clear argument
as to why it's okay to chose not to read, beyond it "being easier".