[WikiEN-l] Featured editors?

[Durova]

> Let me correct a misconception you seem to be carrying.  When an
> admin with long experience of one of our long-term abusers
> identifies a pattern of behaviour matching that abuser, you would be
> *amazed* how often CheckUser reveals that the IPs are either the
> same or open proxies.

So what?  The point is, there's a systemic problem where people who
AREN'T affiliated with with banned editors are routinely being falsely
 accused.  It doesn't matter how often the "reminds me of a banned
user" test is right--  the point is, sometimes it's wrong we need to
stop callously throwing around charges that aren't justified.
******
Yes, Alec.  It's good to stop callously throwing around charges that aren't
justified.

Neither checkuser nor sockpupet investigation is 100% accurate.  We do our
best, but no human endeavor is going to be perfect.  When people seek to
resolve the mistakes in a reasonable way these things get cleared up pretty
quickly.

What happens in practice is that blocked editors who make the most noise
about "injustice" are almost always the ones whose blocks and bans were very
well deserved.  And even then it is quite simple to get reinstated, if they
do us the courtesy of believing we're sincere: just wait by the sidelines
until the block expires, or if it's a ban take a few months' breather and
send a polite request for reinstatement, promising not to repeat the
behavior that led to the ban.

What that requires is patience.  Sometimes it also takes grudging acceptance
of a consensus decision that went the other way or of a policy that's
necessary for the project's overall health (but that causes a few
inconveniences in one's own particular case).  There are very few exceptions
where an editor who acquires those traits couldn't come back.

-Durova