|X-Sender: bderksen@pop.srv.ualberta.ca |From: Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@ualberta.ca |Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed |Sender: wikipedia-l-admin@nupedia.com |X-BeenThere: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com |X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.4 |Precedence: bulk |Reply-To: wikipedia-l@nupedia.com |List-Help: mailto:wikipedia-l-request@nupedia.com?subject=help |List-Post: mailto:wikipedia-l@nupedia.com |List-Subscribe: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l, | mailto:wikipedia-l-request@nupedia.com?subject=subscribe |List-Id: An unmoderated discussion of all things Wikipedia <wikipedia-l.nupedia.com> |List-Unsubscribe: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l, | mailto:wikipedia-l-request@nupedia.com?subject=unsubscribe |List-Archive: http://www.nupedia.com/pipermail/wikipedia-l/ |Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 20:12:25 -0600 | |At 05:42 PM 06/09/02 -0400, The Cunctator wrote: |>On Fri, 2002-09-06 at 17:35, Bryan Derksen wrote: |> |> > Banning someone for being disruptive is not necessarily the top of a |> > "slippery slope" towards censorship, as long as we're careful about doing |> > it and keep a watchful eye on ourselves. On the other hand, letting |> > disruptive yahoos get away with everything will eventually mean that only |> > the disruptive yahoos stick around. |> |>This would be a valid argument if the only way to prevent |>"disruptive yahoos" from "get[ting] away with everything" is to ban |>them. | |Odd bit of logic there, not sure if I can untangle it. Of course banning |people isn't the _only_ way to stop disruptive people from disrupting, |there are other gentler strategies to try beforehand. But what I'm |objecting to is a reluctance to use banning _after_ those other strategies |have failed, which means that disruptive people who are immune to those |other strategies (the merciless editing and ignoring you mention below) |_do_ "get away with everything" because there's nothing else we can do to |stop them. | |>But it isn't. Rather, merciless editing and ignoring personality has |>worked every time so far. | |It's also resulted in the loss of a number of excellent contributors. I |believe that relying on merciless editing and ignoring doesn't work _well_, |and that being more willing to ban disruptive people will result in a |higher quality of Wikipedia overall. | |Maybe we should try it and see. |
Why isn't freezing the topic and the talk page worth discussing? Banning is personal. Freezing the discussion for a day, week, or month is impersonal.
Tom Parmenter Ortolan 88