I appreciate that your suggestion is not to have admins. But aside
from the issue that juries will be slower and less efficient than the
current system for dealing with attack pages, what is the error rate
for admin deletion of attack pages and blocking of vandalism only
accounts? There are areas where admin decisions are sometimes
challenged or contentious, but in my experience the deletion of attack
pages and the blocking of vandalism only accounts rarely if ever
involves admin errors. So this proposal would replace a system that
works well with one that at best would achieve comparable results but
more slowly and less efficiently.
As for blanking attack pages, yes patrollers can and do do this. But
that doesn't stop people cyber bullying by emailing a diff of the
attack page, nor does it help when as so often happens the name of the
attack page is itself an attack.
WereSpielChequers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 21/08/2010, Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
Is it possible to have the ability to blank an
attack page and keep it
locked until an admin looks at it and deletes it?
The point is not to have admins.
You could just have it so that the vote blanks/unblanks the page, in
real time, whenever the total is a majority for blanking. You would
have to make sure that juries are taken from well-established editors,
and that it's understood that people that vote to blank for bad faith
reasons would get permanently blocked (if another jury found that you
had done that).
Carcharoth
--
-Ian Woollard
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
End of WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 85, Issue 28
****************************************