[WikiEN-l] Cla68 blocked for asking question

[Steve Summit]

Durovawrote:
> There are times to put one's foot down and that time was today.
> Wikipedia has been entirely too lenient about this type of disruption,
> with the result that when one brief and overdue block occurs a cluster
> of people are shocked by it.

I understand.  But it behooves you to be careful, to choose the
best moment to put your foot down.

If Cla68 is as disruptive as claimed -- and I have no reason to
doubt it -- you need only a little patience to wait for a truly
disruptive action to apply the waited-for block in response to.
But this wasn't it:

	Most of us usually try to give some reasoning for any
	action, proposed action, or threatened action that we
	discuss on an article's talk page.  Would you mind doing
	the same?

You and the rest of the insiders may know that Cla68 had it
coming and was long overdue for a block, but when outsiders take
this question and your response in isolation -- as of course they
are going to do -- it just makes you look bad; it unnecessarily
provides fresh fodder for those who want to claim that Wikipedia
has become petty and spiteful.

Cla68 may have deserved blocking, but not for that question,
which was innocent enough on the surface, and which could
certainly be ignored even if you know it was posted with
ulterior motives.