[Wikipedia-l] Re : banning (Tim)

Thu Oct 23 10:55:39 UTC 2003

I thank you for this Tim :-)
I do not question the utility of the loggued in ban
option to fight worst cases of vandals. Thank you for
doing it and saving people time.

I note what Jimbo said. I think, just to take a bit of
perspective, it is interesting to read it again, with
awareness of the recent cases discussed.

>I think we need to revisit having the ability for
sysops to ban logged
>in users.  Maybe the wiki way of doing this is to put
the ability into
>the software, but all sysops must agree to use it
*only* to ban
>*certain* variants on a known banned troll.
>
>In the current case, it seems clear to me that
banning Zog, Anti-Zog,
>Baboon Mouth, JamesERay, and so on, should be done
virtually
>instantly, so as to discourage the behavior.

*only* to ban *certain* variants on a known banned
troll.

>This has to be an emergency situation to ban someone
>who is doing something really egregious right now, or
>to ban someone who you are *certain* is one of our
>usual suspects.

Emergency.
Usual suspects.

Egregious is unfortunaly not in my dictionnary, but I
can guess.

And your wise answer : 

>I agree. But how do we implement it? We could create
>the concept of a 
>"trusted user", perhaps defined in terms of number of
>edits and joining 
>date. If a user is not "trusted", a sysop can ban >him/her.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com