JAY JG wrote:
If enough people are reverting you, one could argue that what you are
seeing is actually "concensus", not "3RR gamesmanship".
"One could argue" and "one could prove" are not the same thing.
And when the players in any particular page arrive totally at random,
you have no chance of ensuring that "consensus" will do "the right
thing" even most of the time. My real beef with the cries of
"consensus!" from GeorgeStepanek is that he was the only one doing any
reverting or talking during the time he was demanding there was
consensus. And that's not consensus, it's a form of gamesmanship known
as the "semi-bluff", in which you don't have a winning hand, but still
have a chance to make one as the game progresses.
Personally, I don't think Taxman was doing anything other than
misinterpreting the problem as educated vandalism and taking over where
GeorgeStepanek had to stop (although his countdown of his reverts
indicates he was laying the trap). Taxman's part in this is merely
stupid. It's GeorgeStepanek who crossed the line, making many mistakes
in accusing me of 3RR violation, and then CryptoDerk who went along
gleefully absent of understanding.
--Blair