[WikiEN-l] Re: Blocking without following policy

Sat Jun 12 19:29:33 UTC 2004

Anthere wrote:

> Now, the question is (and that is a very good question) : should 
> sysops take such decisions, or should they wait for the AC to decide 
> for them ?
>
> As I said above, I think the policy leaves room for a group of sysops 
> to act temporarily, before the AC does.
>
> Is it good ?
> *yes, because AC is acting slowly. Participants are getting upset to 
> see reincarnations waiting for 2 months before "judgment" by the AC. 
> It is no good that participants become angry. In real life, there is 
> similar provision.... when someone is said to have done something 
> deeply wrong and is considered a potential threat to the society, he 
> may be put in jail before the judgment is made. He should be put in 
> jail only if there is enough evidence naturally. But this prevents 
> damage to the society, while giving time to judge fairly.
> If there is a mistake, we should deeply apology to the wrongly-blocked 
> person, and re-consider how we are looking for evidence for next cases.
>
> *yes, it is also good because power should be in the hand of people 
> first. Those doing the daily work. This is the wiki way.

I agree with this.  Perhaps if we had an AC filled with lots of paid 
employees or people with no other non-Wikipedia commitments it'd be 
better to have a dedicated investigative team to decide these things, 
but that seems pretty far-fetched.  I think reaching a consensus on 
whether the user is a reincarnation, (the wiki way, as you aptly 
described it) is a better approach.  I'm not sure if this should be 
formalized or left sort of informal, but the general guideline would be 
that if a pretty large majority seem to think it's a reincarnation, we 
should assume it is, while if there is widespread disagreement, then 
perhaps we can't assume it is.

-Mark