I agree with Anthere and Axel on this, and I think they are talking
past each other. The issue here is rewarding bad behavior
sporadically -- that's a good way -- the best way I can think of -- to
get lots and lots more bad behavior out of someone.
So, it isn't really similar to decisions about candy.
--Jimbo
Anthere wrote:
--- Axel Boldt <axelboldt(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
--- Daniel Ehrenberg
<littledanehren(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
well that doesn't prohibit unrevereting of
his
good edits, does it?
The owner of the site has declared that Michael is
not allowed to make
edits on Wikipedia, good or bad. Lacking the
technical means to enforce
this ban, we have decided to try a soft ban. It
would be nice if you
didn't subvert those efforts.
A little analogy: suppose you had a child who keeps
screaming for
sweets. You have three options: 1) always give in 2)
sometimes give in
3) never give in. Option 2 is by far the worst.
Axel
I ***strongly*** disagree. I think a kid who keeps
screaming for sweets is asking for more than sweets.
The solution is certainly not either to never give or
to always give.
A sensible way is to understand why he is screaming,
to make him understand that things are not received
always when one scream for them. But *never* indulging
someone for craving for attention or sweets is
*really* bad imho.
Option 1 and 3 are by the worst option.
Mother point of view.
My kids are perfectly equilibrated kids, with good
teeths, and very few tantrums. Indulgement from time
to time does not spoil. Strict behavior ruin spirit.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l