On 7 July 2014 13:00, Daniel and Elizabeth Case <danc...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> >2) the reasons that people enforcing the rules on Wikipedia ignore > incivility, harassment, and trolling is because that >approach is often the > best way to stop attention seeking behavior. The idea to "not feed trolls" > is well engrained into the >culture and advise given by mature and > experienced people on the Internet. > > Or you can just block them firmly when they deserve it, escalate if and > when you need to block them again, revoke their talk page access if they > continue to use it to troll or harass (they can still use OTRS to request > unblock; however, it’s amazing to see how much humbler they get when denied > an audience), semi-protect pages they continue to use IPs to make the same > problematic edits to and generally make it clear to them they are being > eased away from the community. I realize there *is* a small percentage of > such users that this will not stop, but in seven years as an admin I *have* > seen this approach work much more often than not, regardless of whether > said trolls were harassing me or someone else. > Interesting to hear your experience, Daniel. It doesn't parallel mine at all, but then perhaps we're looking at different groups of problem users. I've never seen anyone "humbled" by a "behaviour" block, in my experience they're usually gone for good (those ones, I suppose, were humbled) or come back worse behaved but usually in a much sneakier way. Of course, on enwiki we do eventually manage to ban a significant percentage of really bad players over time; not all of them, but a fair number once they've pushed enough buttons and annoyed enough people and lost their supporters. On some projects, it is essentially impossible to ban community members (as opposed to one-off vandal accounts). Risker/Anne
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
