Tony Sidaway wrote:
I dispute any suggestion that protection of a page is
in any way *less*
drastic than blocking a user. If a page is protected, *nobody* can edit
it. If one or two over-enthusiastic revert warriors are blocked for up to
a day, only their potential edits are lost--and since they're likely to be
holding up editing by their reverts, their loss is often a very good
thing.
There's one very important distinction: if you block the page, the user
is still able to edit other pages.
I couldn't, for example, discuss the accusation of 3RR violation at all
in the fora on which it was being discussed.
I had to join this mailing list (which honestly I'd rather not have
cluttering up my in-box) to get ANY communication with the community.
I was able to send "user email", but have as yet received zero response,
and expected none from people whose intent was to railroad me.
I couldn't even edit my own user-talk page.
Blocking someone based on a knee-jerk reaction to n biased accusation is
a very bad policy, IMO.
--Blair