User:Michael/Proposal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A discussion about Michael's ban took place on #mediation.wikipedia on 28 August. This is summarized below. Please note this was not an official board meeting; it just happened by coincidence that Angela, Anthere and Jimbo were on IRC at the same time. The discussion was not to lay down policies, which should only come about after proposals are made on the wiki. It was not to discuss the pending arbitration request involving RickK and Guanaco, nor to make any formal decisions about unbanning any user.
In #wikipedia - shortly after Jimbo joined the channel, sannse raised the issue of Danny leaving. There was some discussion attempting to understand the background of the day's events. Because of the large number of participants, the speed of the conversation and the distraction of other simultaneous conversations, Jimbo suggested moving the discussion to another channel. Anthere then suggested people join the mediation channel.
Jimbo said "I would like this conversation to be focused on trying to figure out what is going on to try to calm this matter down a bit. :-)"
Jimbo asked about the blocking/unblocking of Michael that had occurred.
There were some off topic comments from those not involved, so the room was set to "moderated", meaning only Jimbo, Anthere, sannse, Danny, Angela and Guanaco could speak.
Jimbo clarified that "Michael is still officially banned. By me, from way back in the day."
sannse pointed out that he was banned, but not effectively blocked because of the AOL problem.
Guanaco said he had compared Michael's edits to other sources and noted that they were accurate
Jimbo had previously contacted RickK about this, and he was apparently willing to try an alternative solution. However, there was an ambiguity as to whether the ban would be lifted.
Jimbo suggested that once those involved (including RickK and Hephaestos) agreed, he could formally lift the ban under specific conditions that Danny had previously emailed Jimbo about.
The banning policy was mentioned, and Anthere said that while it was traditional to revert banned users, there was not absolute consensus on this. There was some discussion on this point as different people had different views on whether banned user's edits should be allowed to stand.
With regards to the un/blocking and reverting, Jimbo noted that there was "no need for recriminations or punishments."
Jimbo explained that he had contacted Michael but that he "specifically told him not to edit until I told him it would be o.k., and he agreed."
Since the ban is ineffective, and blocks cause disruption to AOL users, alternatives were discussed. For example, Michael could be limited to a certain number of edits in a day if there were people willing to check those, or he could be limited to editing in areas he does not cause problems in, which might include image uploading, or adding category tags.
Danny suggested Wikipedians were vilifying Michael and suggested people need to remain cool to deal with the situation. He felt it would go a long way to see people be encouraging of Michael.
Anthere suggested a "soft ban" where only bad edits were reverted. sannse said this had been tried in the past but people couldn't keep up with it.
Getting Michael to add a {{michael}} template to pages he edits was suggested an possible solution, as was allowing him edits only to his user space or allowing other users to proxy edits for him.
Jimbo was unsure whether Michael would follow a "number of edits per day" type of rule.
Danny proposed that Michael may only edit as "Mike Garcia", that he may only make 10 edits a day and that provided he proves himself, this number may be reviewed after a set period. Also, if he wants to make more edits, he must have them approved. If he errs, it should be pointed out to him in a friendly manner before he the edits over his limit are reverted and that if Michael feels he has a problem, he should contact either him or Guanaco.
Jimbo noted that ambiguity may arise if he made more than 10 edits, but these were good edits. He felt it should be made clear that edits over the limit should not be allowed to stand, in order to make Michael understand that this is not a game, and he can't make extra good edits.
Angela suggested that once the proposal was on the wiki, Jimbo could decide whether to unban Michael
After this discussion on IRC, Danny sent the following proposal by email to Angela, Anthere and Jimbo:
- In the past two years, Michael has been a source of irritation for Wikipedia users, inserting faulty information into articles, acting in an insulting manner, and launching bitter personal attacks against other users. Many attempts were made to deal with this situation: Michael was banned repeatedly and his account was blocked. Until now, these measures have failed. Michael has repeatedly returned and continued to act in ways contrary to Wikipedia's norms and, indeed, any norms whatever. We condemn this behavior and deem it inexcusable.
- Recently, however, Michael has expressed contrition for what he has done. He has stated repeatedly that he intends to reform himself. While there is little real evidence to prove that he is sincere, we have decided to attempt another approach to allow Michael, now known as Mike Garcia to show that he intends to modify his behavior and contribute to Wikipedia.
[edit] Original Proposal
- Please do not edit the proposal in this section.
- Accounts belonging to Mike Garcia are no longer blocked.
- Mike Garcia is allowed to edit using that account and only that account.
- Mike Garcia may make up to twenty edits per day only. He is encouraged to count his edits in the edit summary box.
- Any additional edits by Mike Garcia are to be reverted.
- Mike Garcia may make unlimited edits in his user space and in the Talk pages of articles.
- At regular intervals, it will be determined whether the number of edits that Mike Garcia makes may be increased.
- Mike Garcia assures us that he will strive for the greatest possible accuracy in his articles.
- Users who find problems in Mike Garcia's articles are asked to inform him of them in a civil manner.
- If Mike Garcia feels that he has been treated unfairly, he may direct his complaint to Danny and Guanaco.
- This proposal will be in place for one month, after which it will be reviewed by the Board.
- We hope that all users, whether they have had problems with Michael or not, will welcome him back into the Wikipedia community and encourage and help him to become a productive member.
Please make comments on this proposal below. Angela. 19:02, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)
- The following solutions have therefore been suggested:
[edit] Current version
- Feel free to edit this section and make any necessary changes. Be bold, but follow consensus.
- The account, Mike Garcia, will not be blocked.
- As a condition of being allowed to edit, Mike Garcia must apologize to Hephaestos for his previous vandalism.
- Mike Garcia is allowed to edit using that account and only that account. He may not edit anonymously.
- Mike Garcia will initially have an edit limit of twenty edits per day.
- Mike Garcia may only make up to the number of edits in his edit limit (as defined by a time zone of his choice [Pacific Time by default]). He is encouraged to count his edits in the edit summary box.
- For every two consecutive days that Mike Garcia obeys the edit limit, it will be increased by one.
- For every day that Mike Garcia does not obey the edit limit, it will be decreased by one.
- Mike Garcia may make unlimited edits in his user space and to talk pages.
- Any other edits made by Mike Garcia are to be reverted. Other users may reinstate these edits and claim responsibility for them, but they do not have to and typically should direct their efforts elsewhere. If Mike Garcia abuses this and excessively makes edits over his limit, this proposal may be modified at the discretion of the Board to prohibit their reinstatement.
- At regular intervals, it will be determined whether the number of edits that Mike Garcia makes may be increased.
- Mike Garcia should assure us that he will strive for the greatest possible accuracy in his articles.
- Users who find problems in Mike Garcia's articles are asked to inform him of them in a civil manner.
- If Mike Garcia feels that he has been treated unfairly, he may direct his complaint to Danny and Guanaco.
- Other users are allowed to act as a proxy for Mike Garcia if they wish to help him edit beyond his limit, but if they do so, they agree to take responsibility for the content of their additions.
- This proposal will be reviewed by the Board after one month, who may decide to modify these terms or to impose a hard ban.
- We hope that all users, whether they have had problems with Michael or not, will welcome him back into the Wikipedia community and encourage and help him to become a productive member.
[edit] Comments
Any comments should be posted on the talk page.
