[Wikipedia-l] Our options; *your* opinion requested

[Toby Bartels]

Larry Sanger wrote:

>I solicit your opinion--yes, you, humble (or exalted) list member.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak to your august majesty.

>I ask you, dear reader and fellow Wikipedian, to offer your mere opinion.

Thanks, that's better.

>ISSUE 1.  The problem or lack thereof.

I agree with Matthew Woodcraft's non-strawman CONTRA.
That doesn't mean that there can't be improvements, as below.

>ISSUE 2.  What to do about the problem, if anything.

>The Status Quo, Plus Clearer Principles Option: We need to debate and
>settle upon some clear principles about when sanctions are to be meted out
>by our sysops.

That's basically my choice.

There are some smaller matters of refining the banning process:
* Technical fixes to avoid banning innocent users;
* Granting all administrators the ability to ban logged in users
  (whether by user name or just letting us find out their IP numbers;
   this may depend on how the previous point plays out);
* Unbanning vandals after (say) a week and automatically adding them
  to a page like mav's [[Wikipedia:IP watch list]] (or whatever it's called);
* Anything else that I mentioned earlier but forgot right now
  (I don't think that there is anything, but one never knows).
But I think that banning vandals works pretty well right now.

Banning users like Helga and Lir, however, needs clarified rules,
which will allow people to apply them consistently,
and I'm glad that you have said that you want these rules to be lenient,
because then you'll be on my side in the proposed debate ^_^.
We're not in a crisis situation with regards to this issue,
but we can still get ready for the next time.


-- Toby