[WikiEN-l] Reflections on the end of the spoiler wars

[David Gerard]

On 15/11/2007, Ken Arromdee <arromdee at rahul.net> wrote:

> Actually, I don't know.  Searching gives me a lot of references to people
> supposedly edit-warring by putting back spoiler tags, but specific
> punishments are rarely mentioned.  But accusations of edit-warring carry the
> implicit threat of punishment.


Accusations of 3RR carry the explicit threat of being blocked for
violating 3RR. The appropriate remedy, surely, is "don't do that
then."


> But whether it's being banned or blocked, it's pretty much the same problem:
> users *cannot* put spoiler warnings back in because they could be punished
> for edit-warring and contradicting consensus, when at the same time the fact
> that nobody puts them back is used to *prove* consensus, which is a classic
> catch-22.


No, that's not the case - people were blocked for violating 3RR and
that's it. If you wish to claim otherwise, I look forward to your
evidence diffs.


> Spoiler warnings were removed by abuse of power, abuse of the rules, and
> abuse of logistics.  Of *course* users are going to be mad about this for
> longer than they're going to be mad about standard Wikipedia administrative
> actions.  This shouldn't be surprising at all; in fact, the very fact that
> users are unaccepting for an unusually long time should be a clue that
> there's something different about this case.


As demonstrated by the interest in your complaint in every venue you
took it to, i.e. none.


- d.