[WikiEN-l] Two-edged Sword

Fri Oct 3 16:49:39 UTC 2003

--- "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:
> >Stevertigo wrote:
> >> Well for starters, how about if you, Jimbo. and
> you,
> >> Ed, don't pamper and coddle people "like" him.
> >
> >Be careful, Stevertigo, that sword cuts in both
> directions.
> >
> >--Jimbo
> 
> If I repeat my offer from last year, will Steve or
> anyone else accept
> it?
> 
> Make me a "lieutenant" or "sheriff" or "nursery
> school teacher",
> and I will liberally apply "time-out" to anyone who
> breaks a 
> rule.
> 
> I'll use something like Andrew's graded system of 
> "consequences":
> 
> 1. A friendly explanation or reminder.
> 2. A warning.
> 3. A unilateral temporary ban (length: anywhere
> from, say, 3 to 
>    24 hours)
> 4. An indefinite ban (to be resolved on the mailing
> list and/or 
>    by appeal to our Captain or Head Marshall, Jimbo
> Wales)
> 
> I keep proposing this every 6 months or so, but
> people keep 
> objecting that it will erode our freedom. Well, have
> you ever counted
> the number of writers who LEAVE Wikipedia because
> they have NO FREEDOM
> freedom to contribute in peace here?
> 
> I say we ought to try it out: say, for a 6-weeks
> trial period. 
> 
> If it works, let's keep doing it. If it works but
> needs 
> refinement, let's tweak it. It if it doesn't work,
> let's stop 
> it.
> 
> But anything's better than having several dozen edit
> wars 
> simmering at a low boil, ready to erupt like
> volcanoes at a 
> moment's notice.
> 
> I say, let's give it a try.
> 
> Ed Poor

What if a new page is created where the one-day ban
will discussed, and the person will be banned for one
day if, after 24 hours, the general concensus is to
ban. I just can't see banning completely unilaterally
to be that helpful.
LDan

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