On 6/18/07, Gracenotes <wikigracenotes(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/18/07, Slim Virgin <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
There you go again: assertions with no evidence. It's a demonstrable
fact that many non-vandalism blocks, and possibly most, are punitive,
whatever happier word we prefer to describe them as. Spend a day
checking out the block log and you'll see it for yourself. The
argument goes that punishment is part of prevention, and that's true
to an extent, but it doesn't make the blocks any less punitive.
The most important part is not that the blocks actually are
preventative, but the thought process that goes into making
them considers the preventative, not punitive.
Okay, but now you're very much into wild speculation, because neither
of us has access to the mental states of the blocker.
The ideology
that produces the action, not the action itself. That is my
point.
You just keep repeating what the ideology is. If the block log shows
otherwise, you say "that doesn't count, because they're actions"?
(Banning is an exception to this rule, but that's
why
it's a separate policy.)
It's not just a separate policy, and that's not why it's separate.
It's a different concept.
Prescription is bad when it's based on
unrealistic ideological baggage
that gets in the way of common sense.
Civility, assuming good faith, and ignoring all rules are all part of
unrealistic ideological baggage that baffle common sense.
I disagree. They make a lot of sense, and are far from unrealistic.
You do the first two many times every single day in real life.