On Sep 15, 2006, at 9:09 PM, geni wrote:
If I can't remember
how many warnings a vandal gets, I'll just zap 'em for 24 hours two
warnings early, and call it a day.
This violates AGF thus WP:DICK.
As an admin you are not empowered to do this. Those who enjoy state
analogies would use the comparison you have the role of the police
rather than the executive.
Those who prefer analogies from the world of comic books would argue
that you're Judge Dread rather than Rorschach. You do not have the
power to decide to make a practice of not warning vandals.
Unless I happened to guess wrong and two warnings is now the
convention, I didn't say I was swearing off vandal warning. I said
I'm not going to worry about going up from {{test}} to {{test500}} or
whatever insane number has been cooked up - I'll warn once or twice,
zap, and call it a day.
If it's
against
policy, it must be bad for some reason, so just explain to me what it
does that's bad.
You wish to waste other people's time?
If it's not obvious why it's bad, I don't really see it as a waste of
time.
I figure
anything so complex an admin
who's been editing for two and a half years can't do it is
fundamentally broken.
You realise you've just claimed that our copyright policy is
fundamentally broken? We've got enough problems with people ignoring
it or trying to get around it we don't need any more.
Is our copyright policy that bad? We should probably fix it up then.
-Phil