On 3/22/07, Skyring skyring@gmail.com wrote:
I've seen some people get really anal over this, and indeed I've seen some editors go to a lot of effort to revert good edits or article creations, even going so far as to label them "vandalism in progress", so long as they were by a banned editor they didn't like.
This sort of wikinazi behaviour does nothing to enhance our image; it's fodder for yet another round of articles poking fun at the community, and confirmation that Wikipedia is a place where silly power games are encouraged.
-- Peter in Canberra
I can see the point you are coming from... but if a user is banned, they can either (not endorsing this mind you) post under a new name--start over, not do bad things, and be a helpful member of the community, severing all old ties I guess... or appeal to get their name cleared/unblocked. my concern/problem is that certain admins in presumably good faith are giving people who are banned a free voice to participate... which makes no sense. I am not understanding why we are turning a blind eye for *certain* banned users. Why should some have magic rights the other thousands of blocked ones dont?