The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> General Discussion? What's that all about?

This subforum is for general discussion of Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. For a glossary of terms frequently used in such discussions, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary. For a glossary of musical terms, see here. Other useful links:

Akahele.orgWikipedia-WatchWikitruthWP:ANWikiEN-L/Foundation-L (mailing lists) • Citizendium forums

> 
mbz1
post Wed 21st March 2012, 4:10pm
Post #1


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue 24th Aug 2010, 10:50pm
Member No.: 25,791



http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=482944579

QUOTE
How to figure out improvements in process that lower the number of inappropriate blocks, and increase the number of appropriate blocks, is tricky business!--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] ([[User talk:Jimbo Wales#top|talk]]) 18:39, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


Well, I am not going to discuss how to increase " the number of appropriate blocks", but lowering the number of inappropriate blocks is very easy.

Of course an admin could impose an inappropriate block by mistake, and it could be understood, but there are some situation, in which "mistakes" could be easily avoided, and that's why should not be forgiven.

1. An admin misuses its tools while involved broadly construed

2. An admin blocks a well established editor with an idiotic edit summary as for example "vandalism only account".

3. An admin misuses the tools to bully kids.

In the above situations, a first misuse of the tools should warrant a firm warning, and a second should result in desysoping.

Another way to lower " the number of inappropriate blocks" is to make sure that each and every block rationale is supported by at least one difference, and the more complex the situation is the more differences should be presented.

Another way to lower " the number of inappropriate blocks" is to make sure that during mob lynching on AN/I only uninvolved users are allowed to comment about the block.


Another way to lower " the number of inappropriate blocks" is to allow an editor in question to freely participate in all discussions concerning his/her block.

Another way to lower " the number of inappropriate blocks" is to stop closed tribunals by your arbcom, at least in the cases, where no private info of a third party is involved. Then the members of arbcom and you, Jimbo, would not be afraid that your private communications will get leaked some time some where.

Another way to lower " the number of inappropriate blocks" is strictly follow your own blocking policy: blocks should not be punitive!

I assure you, Jimbo, that these absolutely valid and fair measure that are really easy to implement will drastically lower the numbers of inappropriate blocks.

Just remember, Jimbo, if you care of course, it is much easier to replace a bully, power-hungry admin, and each and every sicko from you arbcom than a valued contributor.

This post has been edited by mbz1: Wed 21st March 2012, 5:26pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
Emperor
post Wed 21st March 2012, 6:05pm
Post #2


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,833
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



A clear-cut, easy to follow appeal process would be nice. Not holding my breath.

It's time for them to accept they're not a small group of a few dozen people, but now an impersonal bureaucracy. They need to put a formal mechanism in place where individuals can appeal to third parties aware of the wider principles involved, and not be at the mercy of roving bands of psychotic-obsessive nerds.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
mbz1   http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid...   Wed 21st March 2012, 4:10pm
Tarc   http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldi...   Wed 21st March 2012, 5:14pm
mbz1   Btw Mila, you should probably ask the Commons ad...   Wed 21st March 2012, 5:38pm
Alison   Btw Mila, you should probably ask the Commons adm...   Wed 21st March 2012, 9:43pm
mbz1   Btw Mila, you should probably ask the Commons ad...   Wed 21st March 2012, 10:11pm
Tarc   BTW tarc post reminded me yet another Russian joke...   Thu 22nd March 2012, 1:21am
Cunningly Linguistic   Demolishing that fucking stupid civility pillar wo...   Wed 21st March 2012, 5:58pm
Malleus   Demolishing that fucking stupid civility pillar w...   Wed 21st March 2012, 11:03pm
Fusion   Demolishing that fucking stupid civility pillar ...   Thu 22nd March 2012, 12:22pm
Tarc   [quote name='Tarc' post='303407' date='Thu 22nd M...   Sun 25th March 2012, 1:16pm
Fusion   I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the s...   Sun 25th March 2012, 2:20pm
Web Fred   I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the ...   Sun 25th March 2012, 2:23pm
Tarc   [quote name='Fusion' post='303538' date='Sun 25th...   Sun 25th March 2012, 7:08pm
Web Fred   [quote name='Fusion' post='303538' date='Sun 25t...   Sun 25th March 2012, 7:23pm
Fusion   Sarcasm is obviously lost on you Eurotrash girls....   Mon 26th March 2012, 11:30am
Alex D   I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over the ...   Tue 27th March 2012, 8:01pm
Tarc   [quote name='Tarc' post='303531' date='Sun 25th M...   Wed 28th March 2012, 1:11am
mbz1   Demolishing that fucking stupid civility pillar w...   Wed 21st March 2012, 6:13pm
EricBarbour   Just remember, Jimbo, if you care of course, it i...   Wed 21st March 2012, 11:56pm
mbz1   Because Orangemike has clearly blocked scores of...   Thu 22nd March 2012, 1:24am
timbo   Just remember, Jimbo, if you care of course, it ...   Thu 22nd March 2012, 1:26am
EricBarbour   OrangeMike? You asked for it...... Mike loves to ...   Sun 25th March 2012, 10:05pm


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 5 13, 5:59am