[WikiEN-l] RE: Wik's vandalism and threats

Thu May 27 20:23:57 UTC 2004

--- Dan Drake <dd at dandrake.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 May 2004 13:59:43 UTC, "KNOTT, T" 
> <tknott at qcl.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> > He's been banned for a week, let's enforce that ban. 
> 
> Does this mean that at the end of the week, he comes back unbanned?  I 
> find that completely incredible, if true(*).  How many times must we 
> appeal to the Supreme Court to get a user banned permanently when he 
> immediately violates a ban that the AC spent vast amounts of deliberation 
> on?  Just how meaningless *is* and arbitration decision?  We seem to be 
> exploring the limits.

Absent a 142.177/EoT/24-type range block directed at the ISP and city a person
edits from, it is not possible to prevent somebody from editing (even then they
could edit from another computer or switch their ISP). So all we can do is
block reincarnations as they come up. The AC ruling also has provisions for
what to do in case of violations. However, the AC is not a police force - it is
up the the Admins to enforce the ruling and for the users to inform the Admins.

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/ 