[WikiEN-l] Assume bad faith, for banned users.

[Flameviper Velifang]

Well, I've been following the recent firethread of [Wikien-l] Featured Editors.
  And I have to say, I'm rather interested in the discussion.
  It seems that everyone's talking about banned users lately, and also that I am one myself.
  So I'd like to say a few words about my situation.
   
  I created an account circa May 2005. At the time, I was something of an immature asshole.
  I freely admit to having done stupid, impulsive things, although at the time they seemed mature. I remained somewhat immature for a while. I'd like to think that I've grown up somewhat from then to now, although my judgement is clouded due to the fact that I'm judging myself. So I'll probably look back at my posts to this mailing list, in forums, etc in a couple years and say to myself "Good Lord, what a douchebag!"
   
  But I digress once more.
   
  I was banned indefinitely once. Removed. Banned for other reasons. Removed.
  This bullshit continues for about a year (2 years? 3, even?).
  And so, on 22 September 2006, I was unblocked.
  At this point (although my memory is fuzzy), I was mostly like I am today.
  However, since I had a history of asshattery, I was pretty closely watched. Very closely.
  After a gigantic shitstorm (I seem to cause a lot of those ;_;), I was blocked again.
  So I edited with an alternate account. Consensus formed to unblock my main account, and so it was unblocked.
  A day after I finally got a fresh start and things were looking up, Jpgordon did a checkuser and then blocked both accounts indefinitely.
  So now I'm back in the bottomless pit where all banned users are kept.
   
  And this is a bad thing indeed.
   
  Now, I recently read this on the mailing list.
  
> Not all banned user edits are bad ones-- they're smart enough to make
>good ones from time to time, just to mix it up.

  This disturbs me. Why? Because it is the most garishly obvious assumption of bad faith which is possible. It assumes that since someone is banned, they must have been a mortal enemy to the project since the day they joined and that their only intent is to destroy.
  Is it possible, perhaps, that a good editor did something bad IN ADDITION to his good editing, and was banned for that? Hell no. At least not in the world of Trolls.
   
  And I'm not trying to destroy the Project. Honestly, I'm not.
  I just want another chance. A chance to edit Wikipedia, a chance to do something good.
  A chance to champion the causes of the other users who got fucked by the system, a chance to show everyone that I can do good.
   
  I don't know why I have to be banned still. It makes me sad that there are thousands of things to do and causes to represent, and that there are blocked users who I can't support because of a bureaucratic trainwreck and a long history of shit.
   
  And I know this will garner responses of "you're a troll and doing this on purpose to get attention", and "rules are rules".
  If I wanted attention, I wouldn't waste 3 years of my life trying to edit an encyclopedia. I'd annoy people in real life, which is far more satisfying.
  Remember WP:IAR? Does that apply only to sysops and the puppetmasters of bureaucracy who can do whatever they want, at any time, without being punished?

  I'm sick of jumping through hoops.
  I just want a chance.
  I won't let you down.

       
---------------------------------
Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.