[WikiEN-l] Abusive editors

Wed Mar 9 16:09:33 UTC 2005

Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Matt R <matt_crypto at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>As far as I know, we don't have any policy to justify blocking over personal
>>attacks. I would suggest unblocking Adam Carr, even though his abusive
>>remarks in this instance are uncalled for and inconsistent with his reputation as a
>>fine editor. I guess everyone blows a fuse now and again.

> All polices are enforceable. Just because a certain one does not specify a
> specific punishment for violating it, does not mean it is not enforceable. The
> ArbCom has banned a bunch of users for regularly violating the no personal
> attacks policy. ASAIK, admins can and should enforce this policy when they see
> it violated after a warning is given. 

There is the fact that a specific vote on whether admins could block people
for personal attacks failed to achieve consensus a few months ago (a real
pity, in my opinion). As such, it's dicey ground.

(Note that we do have IPs being blocked for personal attacks, and
accounts evidently created just for personal attacks being blocked
indefinitely. But those aren't the same as a logged-in proper editor.)

- d.