[WikiEN-l] Wikiquette "committee"

Fri Oct 3 01:23:45 UTC 2003

Gutza's point is right on the money -- too many man/woman hours have
been spent on this and too many bytes sent. Keep it simple.

SHORT TERM
    - Temporary ban on RK, lift after 1-3 days
    - Make sure he understands difference between "User" and "User talk"
    - Reinstate RK fully and keep eye on activities

LONG TERM
We need due process for these cases not because we're legal eagles, but
because 1) it captures the state of affiars and 2) it will save
everyone's time.  There's discussion ad nauseum because folks think
democracy means having to consider every case by individual vote.  It
has to be compartmentalized and captured in some way.

A more defined, comprehensible and fair way would be an escalating set
of warning levels, like DEFCONs (or to be more crude, seven stages of
hell).  This way a user knows where he/she stands, and where he/she's
going.  It would be measureable, well defined and *brief*, something I
know Wikipedians have a tough time doing. :)

A sample system, variations encouraged...

0. NORMAL
1. WARNING
2. AUTO-REVERT (auto revert certain pages for the user)
3. TEMPORARY BAN (time expires automatically)
4. LONG TERM BAN (banned until talks to Jimbo)

I know folks hate labels, "branding" folks or creating classes of users.
However, the RK episode shows it's necessary and far more fair than the
vigilante system we have now.

-Fuzheado