I believe it is vital for our survival, that we manage to transform our communities into a more professional way of working then we have today (which very much look the same as 5 or 10 years ago, when we were newbies)

I for example think about 50% of our project should be closed down as their quality is so rotten it represent a major risk for our global brand (when and if these are made commonly known).

And we cannot accept sysops working as mad despots. Eiither re-election should be made mandatory or a WMF/steward/BoT controlled body should monitor misuse of sysoprights.

And in this perspective I am of the opinion that we must also treat bad user more strict. So I welcome this initiative as a very minor first step, even if it surely can be improved

Anders





David Gerard skrev den 2015-01-20 15:38:
On 20 January 2015 at 14:33, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:

One point that's unclear to me is why the Wikimedia Foundation (or
Philippe, specifically) thinks this policy is necessary. There's been no
shortage of bad people on wiki projects since their inception. We
typically block disruptive accounts and move on.

As I noted, this is a legal stick, not a computer security one.


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to