[WikiEN-l] I've Kicked the Process Habit

[Phil Sandifer]

On Sep 15, 2006, at 9:09 PM, geni wrote:

>
>> If I can't remember
>> how many warnings a vandal gets, I'll just zap 'em for 24 hours two
>> warnings early, and call it a day.
>
> This violates AGF thus WP:DICK.
>
> As an admin you are not empowered to do this. Those who enjoy state
> analogies would use the comparison you have the role of the police
> rather than the executive.
>
> Those who prefer analogies from the world of comic books would argue
> that you're Judge Dread rather than Rorschach. You do not have the
> power to decide to make a practice of not warning vandals.
>

Unless I happened to guess wrong and two warnings is now the  
convention, I didn't say I was swearing off vandal warning. I said  
I'm not going to worry about going up from {{test}} to {{test500}} or  
whatever insane number has been cooked up - I'll warn once or twice,  
zap, and call it a day.

>> If it's against
>> policy, it must be bad for some reason, so just explain to me what it
>> does that's bad.
>
> You wish to waste other people's time?
>
If it's not obvious why it's bad, I don't really see it as a waste of  
time.

>> I figure anything so complex an admin
>> who's been editing for two and a half years can't do it is
>> fundamentally broken.
>
> You realise you've just claimed that our copyright policy is
> fundamentally broken? We've got enough problems with people ignoring
> it or trying to get around it we don't need any more.

Is our copyright policy that bad? We should probably fix it up then.

-Phil