[WikiEN-l] 3RR and gaming the system

Fri Mar 4 19:21:00 UTC 2005

daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:

>There is a serious problem. As the number of Wikipedia rules spiral, we are  
>seeing people figure out how to play the rules for their own personal  
>edification. Meanwhile, three old-time users--172, AdamCarr, and Mirv, who have  
>thousands of valuable edits to their name (regardless of what anyone might think  
>of any of them personally)--have either been blocked or left the project in 
>the  past 24 hours.
>
I don't know about Mirv, but I'm not surprised about the other two;
their attitude has always been that they should be able to do
whatever they think is right, and to hell with anyone who dares to
disagree.

The 3RR is a really simple and obvious rule. I think it's eminently
reasonable to expect a PhD to figure out that if a second revert
hasn't solved a problem, a third one won't either, nor would a fourth,
fifth, or 37th. The fact that they revert anyway shows that it's more
important to them to get their way than anything else. They can only
be "gamed" because they don't even respect other editors enough to
stop the reflexive reverting and ask for help.

This whole blocking for rule violation process should be like
speeding; if I get caught going over 65 or whatever, then my
rational reaction is to take the punishment or plead extenuating
circumstances, and then to get on with my life - not to argue
that the concept of laws is mistaken, that speed limits shouldn't
exist because they interfere with the overall goals of society,
that they should exist for everybody except me because I'm the
only competent driver on the road, or to sell my car.

Stan