[Wikipedia-l] Re: Perl

[fabiform]

--- Tim Starling <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> fabiform wrote:
> > (Perl admitted he made a mistake and said it wouldn't happen again)
> 
> The issue is not whether or not he apologises every time he makes a 
> mistake. We know that he does apologise regularly. The issue is whether 
> he will do it again, or something similar. Perl's judgement is not 
> sufficient, he has to be watched all the time.
> 
> -- Tim Starling

I just like fairness, his apology and more importantly his acknowledgement that
he made a mistake should be considered along with his other actions.  I don't
see either as often as I'd like on wikipedia.

I have no idea how he felt justified in banning someone who'd made only one
edit, we don't block the obvious vandals that fast on en (not that this was
even a case of vandalism).  I opposed him for sysopship on en, and I'm not
happy with him as a sysop on meta either (although the previous policy meant
that mav was perfectly correct to grant him that).

I'm not sure though (trying to look past my bias againt him) whether my reasons
for opposing granting Perl sysopships are sufficient to support de-sysoping
him.  Does that make sense?  Somehow there seems to be a gulf between the two
in my mind.  Given time I suppose Perl will prove us wrong, or make it
abundantly obvious that he cannot be trusted to be a sysop.

Fabi.





	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html