[WikiEN-l] 3RR applied to both parties?

Fri Mar 4 06:59:57 UTC 2005

And , of course, and speaking more generally, if Party A was in the wrong, 
the 3RR rule in effect can be use to silence dissent to a wrong version.

----- Original Message -----
From: slimvirgin at gmail.com
To: geni <geniice at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] 3RR applied to both parties?
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 22:19:14 -0700

> 
> If Geni's interpretation of 3RR is correct, then we have an unwinnable
> game of tic tac toe going on against editors trying to keep nonsense
> out of articles. Within four hours:
> 
> Skyring inserted a falsehood
> Adam reverted: Adam's #1 revert
> Skyring re-inserted it: Skyring's #1 revert
> Adam reverted: Adam's #2 revert
> Skyring re-inserted it:" Skyring's #2 revert
> Adam reverted: Adam's #3 revert
> Skyring re-inserted it: Skyring's #3 revert
> Adam reverted: Adam's #4 revert.
> Skyring calls the cops.
> 
> Given this intepretation of 3RR, there's no way Adam could have kept
> the material out, except by calling other editors to help him, which
> he should have done, but it's a bit silly to have to do that over a
> content dispute that is straighforwardly factual, as it is in this
> case.
> 
> But if we're going to concentrate on process and ignore quality, then
> shouldn't neither or both editors be blocked in this case?
> 
> Sarah
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-- 
_______________________________________________
NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once.
http://datingsearch.lycos.com