[WikiEN-l] Re: me and my three reverts

Thu Feb 3 02:21:19 UTC 2005

At 09:55 PM 2/2/2005 +0000, Pete/Pcb21 wrote:

>Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
>
>>Yes, and there are some good reasons to interpret it fairly literally,
>>while at the same time leaving a little breathing room for common
>>sense recognition that randomly changing one irrelevant word in a
>>different part of the article is still a revert.
>
>The problem with interpretations and hundreds of admins is that it only 
>needs one admin with a "hardline" attitude for the user to be blocked 
>(however temporarily). Under the current model, the will of the mass of 
>the community is irrelevant, it is the outlying opinions that have most weight.

But that one hardliner would also have to be dedicated enough to check 
_every_ possible 3RR violation himself in order for his own standard to 
become "universal" like that. Furthermore, other admins can and do unblock 
"marginal" cases by their own standards as well. I don't think the 
hardliner would have all that disproportionate an impact, overall.

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release Date: 1/28/2005