[WikiEN-l] Don't template the newbies either

[George Herbert]

On 7/9/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/07/07, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I think that not using templates would be a problem.  The templates
> > are there for a reason - to make at least part of the response
> > standardized, in a goes-on-the-record-and-reviewable manner.
>
>
> What you're describing there is bureaucratic arse-covering, not human
> communication.
>
>
> > It's one thing to say "Don't *just* template, explain also".  Saying
> > "Don't template" breaks a whole lot of how we do stuff now.
>
>
> That doesn't make it somehow not bureaucracy replacing communication.
> Because a template only communicates "you have been processed."
> There's clearly not a human behind it, or there's a human pretending
> to be a machine.


Bureaucracy has its purpose and point in the world.

Among other things, a templated list of warnings makes it easy for an
uninvolved admin to look and see "Was this troublemaking user warned
enough that they were in violation of policy?  Have they continued
past the clear warnings?  Should I block them now, or warn again?"

AGF covers a lot.  It could cover being very nice, polite, and
personal with everyone who replaces page after page with "P00p!", or
more topically who ads clear spam to dozens of WP pages.

In practice, right now, the vandal fighters on en are being more
abrupt than that in many cases.

Query: does AGF require us to always be personal (as opposed to
impersonal, template-only) with clear abusers?  Do clear abusers
deserve that?

Query: do those fighting vandalism regularly have enough time to do
so, and keep up with the flood?


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com