I think your feedback regarding this matter (and also regarding punishment
for personal attacks on users) is now fully before the committee. I will
certainly consider it in my decision making. However I continue to maintain
that personal attacks by "good" editors on "bad" editors is
unacceptable.
Fred
From: <slimvirgin(a)gmail.com>
Reply-To: slimvirgin(a)gmail.com, English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:27:42 -0700
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] ArbCom - too attached to 'equal treatment'?
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 16:16:18 -0000 (GMT), Tony Sidaway That doesn't
make sense to me. I do understand the argument that tempbans
where seen as unjust could drive away good
editors, but so can seriously
bad behavior. If a week's rest from editing a few articles is *worse*
than editing those articles in the presence of the behavior about which
one wants to make a complaint, I just don't see that the complaint can be
that serious.
Tony, you'd be right if tempbanning were the only problem, but there
is a perception (as is clearly shown by this thread) that there is a
philosophy of seeking to punish both sides regardless of the issues,
in an effort to bend over backwards to be fair - which I argue is
actually leading to unfairness in some cases. It is this philosophy
that is worrying, and the issue of tempbanning everyone is simply one
example of it. Also, in Andy's case, the proposed tempban covered
areas not affected by the dispute, and was therefore perceived to be a
pre-judgment punishment, not just a peace-keeping measure. In matters
of justice, perceptions matter as much as reality.
Sarah
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l