G'day David,
But that's exactly my point. _What the policy
says_ is (ie 'if this
happens, in this way, then this is the consequence') _all_ that achieved
consensus (and therefore all the is enforceable) - anything above and
beyond that is not endorsed by the community (or, in the case of
decrees, not endorsed by Jimbo unless he subsequently says so) and
therefore is not policy. Taking your example, if there was community
consensus to extending the 3RR to 25 hours then it would be amended as such.
1) Policy is descriptive --- it *describes* what we already do, it
attempts to document consensus. When we look to policy, it's because
we're not sure what to do or, unfortunately rather commonly, because
we want a bat to hit our opponents with and can't come up with a
logical argument (see also "wikilawyering"). As a natural
consequence, what policy says necessarily lags behind what we
actually do --- as someone wise, or possibly Raul654, said, "do what
needs to be done, and eventually someone will rewrite policy to
suit". Or words to that effect. There will always be some activity
on the edges where, if a bloke confines his understanding to policy
(rather than to *Wikipedia*), he'll always be uncertain about what's
happening.
2) The 3RR is a good example. Someone who reverts four times in 25
hours (or, indeed, 24 hours and 30 seconds) is no different from
someone who reverts four times in 23 hours (or 23 hours and 59
minutes 30 seconds). They're all edit warriors, and those who happen
to wait an extra minute for "their revert limit" to reset itself are
doing what's called "gaming the 3RR" or, bluntly, being dicks
(that's
WP:DICK, which process wonks always seem to want to get rid of).
The only reason we say "three reverts in 24 hours" is because you
have to draw a line, however fuzzy, somewhere. You can't accuse
someone of edit warring who made three reverts in nine months, nor
can you take someone who makes twelve reverts in an hour and say
they're not really warring, it's just healthy boyish aggression. 3RR
gives a basic definition. But at the edges ... if I make four
reverts in 25 hours, I'm as bad as someone who does it in 24. Now,
what if I make three reverts every day for two weeks? Is my
behaviour appropriate? Am I entitled to whine about my inevitable
block, because "process says I have to revert four times a day before
you can block me!"? Bollocks, I am.
People are blocked all the time for gaming the 3RR. The 3RR
description itself says "this is not an entitlement". 3RR is about
discouraging and, in some cases, ending revert wars. I suggest
unblocking someone I (or any other sensible admin) blocked for four
reverts in 25 hours would be a very, very silly thing to do.
--
Mark Gallagher
"What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/304 - Release Date: 7/04/2006
