634
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 548:
Line 548: + + + + + + + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Commandments (view source)
Revision as of 01:51, April 13, 2007
, 01:51, April 13, 2007The 90/10 rule
::*Yes, well some of what you wrote I do agree with. However, hard and fast rules, like mandatory sentencing guidelines imposed on Federal Judges, to use a well-known example, also can lead, far more often, to justice being denied or perverted. With a divergent group of Administrators, I have found on other sites that their own good judgement (either before or after meting out punishment, is usually enough to protect users. Absent that, peer pressure and ultimately, perhaps, the site owner(s) (Bureaucrats here) are sufficient brakes on abuse. I do recognize the validity in the scenario you paint above, and have lived it on other sites, and even here. No amount of specificity will protect all of the people, all of the time. There will always be dissension as to punishment, and there will always be what some consider abuse, no matter the precautions, but I would rather have some leeway, than be forced to block someone for a minor offense or mistake. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 21:40, 12 April 2007 (EDT)
::*Yes, well some of what you wrote I do agree with. However, hard and fast rules, like mandatory sentencing guidelines imposed on Federal Judges, to use a well-known example, also can lead, far more often, to justice being denied or perverted. With a divergent group of Administrators, I have found on other sites that their own good judgement (either before or after meting out punishment, is usually enough to protect users. Absent that, peer pressure and ultimately, perhaps, the site owner(s) (Bureaucrats here) are sufficient brakes on abuse. I do recognize the validity in the scenario you paint above, and have lived it on other sites, and even here. No amount of specificity will protect all of the people, all of the time. There will always be dissension as to punishment, and there will always be what some consider abuse, no matter the precautions, but I would rather have some leeway, than be forced to block someone for a minor offense or mistake. --~ [[User:TK|TK]] <sup>[[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]]</sup> 21:40, 12 April 2007 (EDT)
== The 90/10 rule ==
The 90% 10% edit rule is wrong and should be removed. It just doesn't make sense. To suggest that entries of talk pages are bad is utterly muddleheaded.
The rule encourages people to edit without discussion beforehand, which is highly undesirable.
What is worse, I have seen Aschlafly use it to intimidate people who he is ideologically opposed to or who have asked difficult questions. He, of course, likes the rule because it is the criticism of his behaviour and the behaviour of those he protects that is the real target of the rule.
Under the rule this very post is a black mark against my name. I had better go and do a quick edit to make up for it. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 21:51, 12 April 2007 (EDT)