Talk:Sysop vigilantiism: Difference between revisions
comment re: sysop vigilantiism by Ray Saintonge on vile maililng list
mNo edit summary |
(comment re: sysop vigilantiism by Ray Saintonge on vile maililng list) |
||
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Isn't this a typo and should be [[Sysop vigilantism]]. For all I care this stuff should all be collated to [[AWR]] --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 13:18, 28 Feb 2004 (EET) | Isn't this a typo and should be [[Sysop vigilantism]]. For all I care this stuff should all be collated to [[AWR]] --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 13:18, 28 Feb 2004 (EET) | ||
:Nope, there are definitely two syllables there, as it means vigilante-ism. At least it is always pronounced with two syllables. | |||
:It can't be one of your [[AWR]] unless you think the [[Wikipedia]] [[GodKing]] makes such rants, and is also a [[142.X.X.X]]. Which is not out of the question. But he invented the word, not us, and he said it happened, not us. | |||
----------- | |||
"When we have the situation that some individual is suspected of being | |||
the reincarnation of a banned user, many, including some sysops start by | |||
acting on their suspicions rather than seeking out hard evidence. There | |||
is rarely a need for hasty action when the suspect is confining his | |||
activities to a handful of articles; there will always be time to fix | |||
this when the issue is clarified. | |||
... incessant gnattering about whether someone's edits resemble those of a banned user serves no useful purpose.... | |||
There is a serious need for some people to start understanding what | |||
standards of proof are all about." - [[Ray Saintonge]][http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-June/013498.html] |