[WikiEN-l] EoT's behaviour and refusal to stop

Wed Aug 27 02:46:32 UTC 2003

>
>Dr. Duffy wrote:
>"Much of what went on was simply Robert-baiting and
>anti-Robertism. That does not make it right, but it is
>wrong to attach religious or ethnic connotations to
>what has been going on. There have been cases of
>jew-baiting on wiki, a few cases, and I have blocked
>on the most recent culprits and called for the banning
>of another."
>
>This is highly quotable. May I? While I agree with
>nearly everything James has said, I disagree that EofT
>deserves banning. Punishing one child and not the
>other is a typical manifestation of lopsided parenting
>- usually resulting in a
>great despartity between how they are each treated,
>and consequently how they each continue to behave.
>Banning EofT, despite his rudeness, and inability to
>take good sound advice -- and not banning RK -- in all
>fairness, would only exacerbate the percieved problems
>of rampant anti-Semitism and philo-Semitism on
>Wikipedia.
>
>While one may deserve the other, and while the rest of
>the world may deserve neither, this does not mean that
>misplaced force will ever solve anything. Of course,
>HL Mencken disagreed:  "Hanging one scoundrel, it
>appears, does not deter the next. Well, what of it?
>The first one is at least disposed of." But then so
>many good turn of the century commentarians were
>speechless after 1945. Will Rodgers... Harry Truman,
>etc. etc.
>
>-S-

I understand your point and I do believe that Robert's behaviour is 
seriously wrong. However I have to say that EoT's behaviour, specifically 
his creating of some many abusive /pages/, not merely fights on pages, way 
crosses the line of acceptable behaviour. RK's behaviour is no justification 
for EoT's response, which breaks just about every rule of wikiettique 
imaginable. EoT has been repeatedly asked to stop creating these pages, and 
has refused to do so. Jimbo has made it clear that he HAS to stop, yet he 
has continued with the behaviour. In the circumstances I see no alternative 
but to ban EoT. /Any/ user who acted in that manner in my view forfeits the 
right to be on wikipedia.

RK's behaviour is grossly unacceptable and needs to be confronted also. 
Wrong as his behaviour has been, in tone and context, however, at least he 
has not created a whole stream of abusive personalised subpages about his 
opponents, which to my mind is a worse offence. With EoT out of the way, 
Jimbo also needs to get tough with RK and warn him that his behaviour is 
unacceptable and MUST stop.

I was not casting judgments on the nature of the abuse by both men against 
the other and treating one as worse than the other, merely observing the 
fact that one user, EoT, used a methodology that is unprecedented in wiki 
history and is so far beyond the realm of acceptable behaviour that it 
beggars belief. The sheer scale of that offence and consistent refusal to 
stop requires nothing short of a ban.

JT

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail