On 21/07/09 10:26, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 21/07/09 10:05, Alice Kaerast wrote: > >> On Tue, 21 Jul 2009 10:00:25 +0100 (BST) >> Steve Hill<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>> If there is a user who (by general consensus) is making nonsense >>> edits and is continuing to do so after having been taken to task by >>> email, I would have thought the first thing to do is to ban the user >>> from making edits before considering what to do about the edits they >>> have already made. Bonus points for being able to display a message >>> explaining *why* they've been banned when they next try to edit >>> stuff, with details of who to contact to resolve the situation. >>> >> That's the most sense anybody has spoken on this so far! Clearly the >> user needs banning from making edits until we decide whether or not to >> revert all the edits. I have heard nobody suggest that this user's >> edits are not nonsense, so why are we still arguing over what to do >> about this?! >> > Well because banning people is not something we do lightly! > > As the person with the technical ability to do it I would generally only > do so with the agreement of the Data Working Group - only dire > emergencies would lead me to apply a block directly without such a > request from the appropriate body. > It's also worth noting that if we ban him he may just go and open a new account and continue... at least now we know what to keep an eye on.
Cheers Chris _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
