[Wikipedia-l] Re: Ban warning to GrahamN

[Michael R. Irwin]

Daniel Mayer wrote:
> 
> On Friday 06 September 2002 06:16 pm,  The Cunctator wrote:
> > But it isn't. Rather, merciless editing and ignoring personality has
> > worked every time so far.
> 
> If you consider the fact that Michael Tinkler and JHK leaving the project due
> to kook fatigue as "working" then I would have to agree with you.
> 
> > We already have sufficient policies in place for banning people. The
> > harm in expanding them would outweigh the benefits.
> 
> I don't think anybody is talking about expanding any current polices. What is
> needed is some enforcement of policies that we already have.

Prior to commencing enforcement, if that is decided somehow, the
policies and introductory material should be edited to reflect
the proposed new regime.  The ratification process to be used
to select community preferences should be published prominently 
on the main page and perhaps peoples talk pages.

An orderly process that is widely perceived as fair could avoid
a lot of damage in the transition.

Regards,
Mike Irwin